Previous Index Next
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 11:59:24 -0500
Sender: New Ways of Thinking List <FNORD-L@UBVM.BITNET>
From: "c15h15n2con(c2h5)2" <ABS002@>
Subject: Re: this sucks
>>Now, I suppose that having said it, I could go into some long-winded
>>explanation of why I said it, and we could all join hands and kick
>>the living shit out of Christopher Blosser . . .
>gee, thanks -- nice to be noticed.
no problem. stick around and you might even be LISTENED to...
>oh, but you can call me 'mugwump.'
i thought it was Cthulu or some other uninspiring unoriginal name...
>>but what would be the point? For a variety of reasons, some of us
>>wanted this list deep sixed, and we've been expending a lot of time
>>and energy trying to kill it.
>why?
if anyone knew the real answer to that, it would have been finished a longtime
ago.
>I didn't know FNORD had a death-wish! . . . for so long it has stood
>valiently against the repressive measures of tyrant-boss murali, and
>now you wanna give in and kick the bucket???
murali is still an asshole. this was just another attempt at pissing himoff.
>fine. be that way. if suicide's your thing, i ain't complaining. hey
>but would you mind if i just lurked in the shadows and WATCHED??????
yes.
>mugwump =-)
alex
knight jerqui
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 19:25:36 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: The vexations of tiammat against gilgamesh
dvorah sang, "where was dan with his ships?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 1994 02:57:50 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.SUNYSB.EDU>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: what's a nice jewish boy doing at the u fla gainesville
To: Multiple recipients of list ANTHRO-L<ANTHRO-L@UBVM.BITNET>
Since when do Jewish parents send their kids to U Fla Gainesville, a
notorious party school for bleached out goyim?
How can anyone who is truly culturally dissident consciously resort
to a phonus-balonus usage like "deliberately countercultural"?
How can anyone except out of misguided, if grandiose and vaulting
careerism, overtly, in public, without shame, indulge in such words,
placed shamelessly for innocent children to see on television, as
"Cybernaut, PoMoDemite, Noetician, Situationiste," not to speak of the
ever-egregious "et al." The latter at least has the singular virtue of
having had *staying power*; but alas, where, today, are the "Situation
ist[e]s" today? Gone, wherever the Now has gone. Who, today, recalls the
Now? I recall, young fellow, when they first brought out the Now. And I
said, "Naaaaaah, it can't last." So I watched, and I waited, while fools,
postscarcity freakos for whom money grew on trees - and ya know, man, back
*before the war*, you know which war, not the Gulf Oil War, I'm tellin' ya,
we had a real military war to oppose in my day, highly praised in the
highest of places *precisely exactly because* there was this Enemy, whose
virtue inhered in being not too easily defeated, not too easily victorious.
And sure enough, look around, *the NOW is a Thing of the Past*!"
Just before the War, on account of, young fellow, *we do not count* what
was fought in the John F. Kennedy Administration, there was this book come
out, Monopoly Capital, by Baran & Sweezy, which I copped in Berkelyfrom,
you know, a Dealer, and in this book it said, there was only *one thing*
that could save armenia (you remember, "beautify armenia get a harelip,"
Firesign Theater, All Hail, Columbia Records, 1970) from impending doom
from a Crisis of "surplus absorbtion," which was, send half a million men
to the Asian landmass and Use Up, by any means necessary, all the arms and
ammo and machines of war and bombs and copters and construction sites, and
*all kindsa Stuff* we got too much of elsewise. And they said, too good to
be true, they'd never do such an obvious Thingie. But somebody read the
book! That's why Marxism is a big industry in this country. Situationism,
see, is Made For Television. "Society of the Spectacle," all that obsolete
junk. Old tech. Nobody except me, though, has got a Marxism that runs on
computers. *And* comes equipped with a humanware that invades the
signification systems of the readership of the screenship, so they
read it compulsively like a computer virus in the brain, then type on
their keyboardship either fanmail or that hatemail which says, I waste
valuable time and money, they *can't stop*. Invest in Marxism now, pay
later.
I guarantee you there was a rough patch from 1989 to 1991, but look
at the Progressive Sociologists Network. You know "On the Internet nobody
knows yer a dog?" Well, Marxists, and Sociolgists too, with a significant
interaction term if they are both, *want a better class of people*. So
the Listowner is telling Everybody, who is Them, you dig, to send in
a Thingie which is a mini-CV, looking as classy-academic-professional
as allgetout, and him or it what don't, me, is the dog, which they know
already. Mistake I made, I wasn't the best writer on that list. You hafta
be a dog, you do like me. If you are *not* a dog, you are *silly* beyond
compare *and a half*.
What this is, *schmegeggie*, is *doubletalk with content*. Daniel A.
Foss can do it, which you can't. Which is the *least* of the ire-inducing
aspects of saying you could for all these good people, who have excellent
reason to socially construct that they are Smart to the point if *feels
essential*, they *experience their Smartness*, they way you *don't*,
read me, what you feel is *inadequate* at a goyish party school, can't
even swim except in the innernet, which is Bronx for Internet, what else
but *inadequacy* can you possibly have to keep private? Huddling in fear,
hiding your Stupidity, by the standards of the Jewish people, of course.
Look at the evidence of your text: You want to hide being Jewish, it's
"irrelevant." Before the Jews got hold of this place, this USA was a savage
sinkhole of tribal wars and exclusive obsession with money. Look around you.
Thanks to the Jews, it's now a world-class civilization, manufacturing
millions of people a year who can act intelligent, maintain coolness, exude
suavity, and outclass organism for organism any Europeans pretending to
class; obsessed not with money but with Socioeconomic Status, Occupational
Prestige, and Professional Reputation; where those obeying the Prime
Directive of the transmutation of living flesh into print attainImmortality,
have graduate students teach their res gestae in History of Ideas programs.
Further: "If I'm going to be flamed or receive death threats (this
has happened on other lists, not this one).... So yer being flamed, you
won't die. The death threats, that's probably Lamont, on <Leri@gossip.
pyramid.com>, don't say you don't know what I'm talking about, you gave
me the evidence right here, Lamont threatened me too, don't worry about
him. Besides, recall I gave them my password, they can hack right in and
wipe me out. Are you paranoid? It's OK, don't worry about it. Yet.
*Here* is where I get you, *shloime*. You know what you did to me?
You insulted a very dear friend of mine. Only someone who is on *both*
ANTHRO-L *and* <Leri@gossip.pyramid.com> can decode the signification
in the series "Geertz...Dan Foss...Doctress Neutopia...Malinowski." Take
out your Levi-Strauss de la Poche from your preworn preshrunk preholed
Levis and observe how readily we decode this into: Genius...Subhuman...
Subhuman...Genius. Which is no way to treat the most important human
being there is to me in the entire world. Dr Libby N. Hubbard, PhD in
Future Studies, U Mass, 1993. Whom I am about to invite over here to
fill in the readership on postmodern architecture, on which she is an
expert and you are a complete ignoramus.
You have set up, on account of taking advantage of my dear friend's
self-promotion act being *even worse than yours*, made it quite impossible
for her to feel the professional respect and acceptance she deserves. You
know what they did, they don't. Get out before I throw you out. Either
that, or post an apology, you have her userid.
One last thing. Are you on <Leri@gossip.pyramid.com> as a *social
scientist*, or as a *real kid*? Some of us need to know this stuff.
for shame,
Daniel A. Foss
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 1994 09:02:55 PST
Reply-To: NELSON@USCVM.BITNET
From: Stephanie Nelson <NELSON@>
Subject: Angry Jewish men
To: Multiple recipients of list ANTHRO-L<ANTHRO-L@UBVM.BITNET>
This routine is becoming tiresome:
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 need on
this list is racist chest-beating. For shame, Stephanie Nelson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 1994 15:23:34 -0500
From: Rafael Candido Alvarado <rca2t@>
Subject: MISANTHRO-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ANTHRO-L<ANTHRO-L@UBVM.BITNET>
All of this reminds of the conflict I had with Foss last year, which
some of you may remember, and which is the reason I don't read his posts
anymore. Prior to that conflict, after having detected a dangerous
As for the subject heading, it sums up what Foss's "paradigm" in my
view is, which label I do not apply in jest: it is a characteristic of a
certain kind of social science that is not necessarilly unjustified. It
is however severely limited and is one sure way to alienate one's peers,
thereby reinforcing the emotive basis for the attitude in the first
place. ..
As for the subject heading of this post, it sums up what I think of
Foss, and not really in jest.
--
R.C. Alvarado
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 94 23:41:25 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: sorry made some terrible mistakes
Would have said something publicly, but I'm swearing off posting altogether
for a while, having got myself in Trouble again. Sorry, I did make very
serious mistakes last week. First, Steve Mizrach, today, was most accurate
in replying to that Thirsday night or Friday morning post as a farce. It
had been intended as a "faux flame," intended to convey to the general
readership the impression or rather the *experience* of a flame, but which
was so full of yiddishisms as to be *incomprehensible*. To Steve Mizrach,
on the other hand, the intended message was, "here is how to be
'countercultural,' whatever that means, or at least countersubcultural
in the present case: outrage conventions in a noncustomary fashion and
sample the confusion afterwards." Which might have worked, had the tone
been sustained throughout and been just a bit lighter. But in the last
paragraph, I got phony-chivalrous and, hence, *serious*, which reversed
the tee-hee affect wherewith most of the thing was written. This was
poor.
On Saturday, I'd planned to write something to add another layer of
"meanings" and contradictions to the dispute I'd already aroused on the
list, planned as farce, with the intent of smothering the catcalls and
tribal warfare erupting on the list with comic relief. That I could have
got away with this, even had it been well done, was of course grandiose.
Then, for reasons I cannot recall, I wrote that nasty, brutal, awfulparagraph
aimed at Stephanie Nelson. Upon reading the part of the paragraph she cited,
I was frankly appalled at the viciousness of the tone. Also, when I consider
the rest of that post, it was so dripping with misogyny as to have been
shameful.
So I'm really sorry.
Daniel A. Foss
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 08:46:58 PST
From: NELSON@
Subject: Re: sorry made some terrible mistakes
To: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.sunysb.edu>
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 26 Jan 94 23:41:25 EST
Yeah, and look at the terrible state of the list right now--all thenastiness
being heaped on everyone from the revenge of the lurkers. You did a lot of
damage, Dan. This happens way too often.
Stephanie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 12:27:20 EST
From: DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: yes, you're right
To: "Stephanie J. Nelson" <NELSON>
Resent-Message-Id: <940127.122720.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Have noticed marked deterioration in quality of posts and frequency of
on-screen psychotic episodes. This is not explicable by Drugs alone, as
use of same has if anything got more stable. So this kind of stuff has
been a matter of increasing concern to me for the past year. This is why
I disappear for two months at a time, at least, the last time. Then I
return and compare the results with the previous effort.
I have files of the mudslinging, and am about to extract the relevant
posts. As you know, I use such documentation to speculate on flamingbehavior.
There's a big difference between saying, "You did a lot of damage, Dan," and
"There was damage waiting to happen, where the group has become habituatedto
using you, Dan, as the triggering mechanism," which is the alternative
possibility. I recall you, several months ago, writing "Very nice post,Dan,"
in response to something called "Sociology of the flaming culture," which
posited "free-floating aggression," itself requiring explanation, as the
immediate contributory or underlying cause. Let me check the data right now.
There are times when I am tempted to take all the blame for Everything,
which is of course grandiosity. But that's your thesis here. The evidence
would take the form of *all* the rockets, mortars, and artillery going after
me. (Which happened before.) A generalized brawl would point somewhat
elsewhere. Where it's all my fault, given the genuine substrate of self-
effacing conformist - if I could have written like you, plural, in Academic
High Style, I would have - I do profusely, even ludicrously, apologize.
Finally, I should note that I try to make interventions (or comebacks)only
at such times when the list is stagnant, iterative (which amounts to thesame
thing), or frivolous without my intervention. The latter invariablycommences
with full high seriousness of purpose, however ineptly. Excesses andcorruption
entered this time with the posing of the problem, "What do I have to do to
divert the list from *yet another* what-is-culture ping-pong game. (I still
have a hundred pages of unread or unreadable pages on "Construct Realism"
sent by John O'Brien to remember the last one by; and even more to print
out at some future date. Sent as Ascii files, WPed. No request for comments
yet.)
Get back to you. -DAF
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 10:56:39 PST
From: NELSON@
Subject: Re: yes, you're right
To: DFOSS@CCVM.sunysb.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 27 Jan 94 12:27:20 EST
The unsolicited construct realism sludge made me laugh. I know exactly what
you mean about trying to rescue the list from the "what is culture"ping-pong
game. And it could be free-floating agression indeed. So I only blame youfor
starting it. Is that fair?
Stephanie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 14:08:34 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: responsible for starting what under which conditions with
To: "Stephanie J. Nelson" <NELSON@>
Message-Id: <940127.140834.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Still accumulating e-lint. The offense wherefor I'm culpable must yet be
defined in terms of the data, still under collection, interrupted byclaiming
of computer by TA of class using room; this computer is in the ComputerRoom's
Other Room or Museum, where the obsolete junk, grapes of wrath (confiscated
under NO EATING rule), and floppy lost & found are located. This machinewould
not work so long as I didn't check the IP address of the mainframe, still
129.49.1.183, not 129.49.2.183.
Given that I had established a quasi-trickster role, and more recentlyhad
announced indulging in fabricating the (subjective) experience in thereader's
mind of reading a post apparently spontaneously written. Which may have been
beyond my capacity, but there are degrees of bungling. The aforementioned(two
letters ago) "faux flame" effort you pounced on was, as already noted, sopoor
that, before daring to leave town, I had to attempt damage containment,while
having of course forgotten after some sound sleep what I'd intended to do.
If not Trickster, then perhaps Dennis The Menace. But I'm trusting in
"grownups'" maturity and judgment to not get carried away by my bad jokes,
or even the paragraph affecting the posturing of the Return of the Revenge
of the 'My Boyfriend's Back' Boyfriend. All this suggests a range of guilt
from "unintended consequences," or "Who knew?" as Mel Brooks would have it,
through the diabolical, the latter more appealing to my guilt megalomaniathan
to reason.
The Special Prosecutor in my head hasn't closed the investigation on what
I knew and when I knew it. - DAF
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 38
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 15:24:14 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: preliminary results
To: "Stephanie J. Nelson" <NELSON@>
Message-Id: <940127.152414.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Cursory examination of the data shows that of those posting, there were only
two who evinced anger or intense hostility, and that of these, the formerwas
sent by Dave Heller, the latter by you. Hostility to Heller developed within
the Jewish community by billiard-ball reaction, ignoring me; with only Dan
Jorgensen, from among non-Jews and unamericans, joining Heller's critics.
From my off-line e-mail, the following two items might or might notamuse:
1.
>Daniel,
>
>You need to use a few more commas when you write.
2.
>the futures field ...(Stephanie's 'Angry Jewism Men' just scrolled up -
>coincident with report on Lorena Bobbit verdict .. HOWLS of laughter!!
>... shattering my train of tho't. later this weekend .... KEEP WARM!
Persons who got disgusted with the list because "that asshole Foss and
his cohorts" including, in order of immediately prior posting, Vance,Seeker1,
and even Dwight Read, one supposes, are not relevant to this incident, asthe
same or worse occurred on the previous protest occasion, merely because the
posts were too long or "gibberish."
Conclusions:
1. Quality control of script going over the air, combined with moreintense
scrutiny of ratings and shares figures to ascertain if natives of restless,is
desirable.
2. Hotline communication should be instuted between LI and LA to preclude
possibiltiy of a nuclear exchange. This may not be possible, however: The
record indicates that the Paranoid Hypothesis, while hardly vindicated, is
by no means as deeply buried as it was prior to the present study. - DAF
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 21
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 16:08:29 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: should a kid of 21 be juvenile
To: Michael Forstadt <forstadt@>
Message-Id: <940127.160829.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Seeker1 may be a mere stripling of 21 to 23 (high estimates). Or younger.
If, as is likely, Harvard gravitas is incompatible with iuvenilitas, is it
permissible to indulge a kid in his juvenility in other contexts? Not for
nothing do we say, "If you're not 21 and able to prove it, don't ask us to
sell you a car." Or should we insist that, "If you're only young once, that
is once too often and the height of frivolity." How about, "Dwight Read as
the hand that rocks the cradle of civilization."
Cheers,
Daniel A. Foss
<If this were America Online, you'd receive a bill for each awful joke
received. Please count. If you have complaints about your bill, we are
terribly sorry but the enumeration by our joke manager must be considered
final.>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 44
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 18:42:38 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: it was intentionally contrived as farce and selfparody
To: David Heller <daveh@>
Message-Id: <940127.184238.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
And a hearty O Wow to you, David:
Now that the last repercussion has -cussed, and I have the completeposted
record cum relevant offline e-mail regarding the recent ANTHRO-L Jewish
Question, it may be divulged that the offending post, "what's a nice jewish
boy like you doing at the u fla gainesville," had, by initial intent the
following design (however marred by flawed execution), as cited on the sneak
with the use of lines copied from a letter sent yesterday to S. Mizrach and
S.J. Nelson (yes, moral qualms anent privacy invasion; albeit wherein wrote
it better yesterday than possible today due to receiving long phone call at
2:30am, sacrifices we all have to make):
>serious mistakes last week. First, Steve Mizrach, today, was mostaccurate
>in replying to that Thursday night or Friday morning post as a farce. It
>had been intended as a "faux flame," intended to convey to the general
>readership the impression or rather the *experience* of a flame, butwhich
>was so full of yiddishisms as to be *incomprehensible*. To SteveMizrach,
>on the other hand, the intended message was, "here is how to be
>'countercultural,' whatever that means, or at least countersubcultural
>in the present case: outrage conventions in a noncustomary fashion and
>sample the confusion afterwards." Which might have worked, had the tone
>been sustained throughout and been just a bit lighter. But in the last
>paragraph, I got phony-chivalrous and, hence, *serious*, which reversed
>the tee-hee affect wherewith most of the thing was written. This was
>poor.
The research tactic of perpetrating a selective or provocative normviola-
tion in a subculture to test normative boundaries or very existence of anorm
was, in the hands of H. Garfinkel, called the "happening." This, to be sure,
was nowhere near so well-planned, if planned at all; no research design so
much as a why-not. Sorry if you were one of the people more disconcertedthan
appeared to have been usual.
If still angry, or whatever, please write me.
Friends?
Daniel A. Foss
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 16:08:41 PST
From: NELSON@
Subject: Re: preliminary results
To: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.sunysb.edu>
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 27 Jan 94 15:24:14 EST
It is interesting that your "preliminary results" left out one very big one
on you from Rafael Candido, where he basically said, "there he goes again
with character assassination and irrational anger, which is why I don't read
his posts anymore." Very interesting you would forget that one. Or do you
not read his posts either? I agree with him, by the way--at least with his
charges, if not yet with his related decision. You might want to dig thatone
out of your files, Dan.
Stephanie
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 53
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 19:24:16 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: priority list
To: "Stephanie J. Nelson" <NELSON@>
Message-Id: <940127.192416.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
I've been going through the laserprintout, and have given priority to
writing letters to, most recently Dave Heller, those most pained oranguished
by their own mixed feelings, intellectual contradictions, or just plain
incomprehension. I do indeed have the post sent by R. C. Alvarado, and shall
put him on the recipient list, with perhaps a query anent why he did not
simply delete that one also, thereby saving me the trouble of composing the
present missive etc etc.
Seriously, however, while I applaud R. C. Alvarado's apparent progress in
his studies, implicit in his apparent withdrawal from preoccupation with the
burning issues of the day as indicated by the more learned content of his
posts of late, which I take reflective of immersion in the Spirit ofLearning
and Truth, I should like very much a detailed and logical explication ofwhat
my "paradigm" is, as he puts it, and what a person who has made such fine
progress in his studies is doing dallying with a first-year-studenty word
like "paradigm" anyway.
This is to say that, whilst I still hold you in respect and awe in the
areas of analysis and passion, along with your inimitable combinations ofthe
two, R. C. Alvarado by contrast is illuminated by you at best as a satellite
by its primary, assuming you have taught him anything. If you've not been
coaching him, then his unimpressiveness is, well, both unimpressive and his
own, still.
Which reminds me of yet another sub rosa, if there is a tunnel through
the Napa Valley community of that name, connection between you and someone
else. Implicit, by contrast. It had flashed through my mind that theaforesaid
qualities, analytical power and (usually) political passion, areundeveloped,
rudimentary, in another woman, self-styled feminist, whom no feminist anyone
calls a feminist accepts as such. Who called me at 2:30am last night, which
I took as a sign of love, and harrangued me about not turning her intosomeone
else, as I was Suspected of trying to do; and what could I say but that Iwas
trying to turn her into a better her, which I'd equate with Stephanie J.
Nelson. Who is not, whatever her, S.J. Nelson's, dissertation is about,going
to have a title anything like: Gaia, The Planetary Religion: The Sacred
Marriage of Art and Science. PhD Diss[Future Studies], Unpub., U.Mass,
Amherst, 1993. You may be sure, Stephanie J. Nelson, that I shall show her
even the nasty stuff you wrote about me for emulation. Cloning is thesincerest
form of flattery. Had I a life to live over, I'd live it as SJ Nelson's word
processor; but failing this, my hoard of your collected writings shall
reconstitute a fragmented simulacrum of your cognitive processes in someone
who shouldn't deserve such a what was it role model? template. All hail
Haraway.
Respectfully,
Daniel A. Foss
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 1994 22:16:56 -0500 (EST)
From: David Heller <daveh@>
Subject: Re: it was intentionally contrived as farce and selfparody
To: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@CCVM.sunysb.edu>
In-Reply-To: <940127.184238.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Daniel,
i don't get angry over email, or even a list. I still remember it as
virtual. But also most of the time I just don't understand what you are
saying. But I think that is more me. :)
You are on Li?
I'm on Manhattan. So close yet so far. :)
see ya
dave
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 96
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 21:44:21 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: you are next on the apology list
To: Mike Lieber <u28550@>
Mike,
Have got around to cleaning up accumulated e-mail piled up since Friday,
and have made a file of the argument mainly among certain Jewish members of
the list, and what I certainly continue to believe is a pretextual smear
that Stephanie J. Nelson hit me with. (Wherefrom yet further trouble ensued,
from which at whatever cost, I am trying to appese the consequencesthereof.)
The final story of why the post, *apparently* a flame of seeker1/Steve
Mizrach, is yet different from the previous ones. I'm sorry about thetrouble
which may have arisen from it, but it was more than anything else a farcical
put on, evoked or provoked by seeker1/Steve Mizrach's repeated assertionsover
a couple of months that he might be me, and on the most recent occasionprior
to the *faux flame*, that he was "being deliberately countercultural,"whatever
if anything that means. The farce was however contaminated by another
objective, hence was flawed and faulty in execution; the extent to whichthat
mattered is unknown.
I am getting very tired after many hours in front of the screen today,
so here is a copy of most of the letter I sent David Heller, which itself
contains lines copied from a letter sent simultaneously to both Stephanie
J. Nelson and seeker1/Steve Mizrach.
[Letter resumes after the second dashed line at the bottom:]
---------------------- BEGIN INCLUDED TEXT----------------------------------
Now that the last repercussion has -cussed, and I have the completeposted
record cum relevant offline e-mail regarding the recent ANTHRO-L Jewish
Question, it may be divulged that the offending post, "what's a nice jewish
boy like you doing at the u fla gainesville," had, by initial intent the
following design (however marred by flawed execution), as cited on the sneak
with the use of lines copied from a letter sent yesterday to S. Mizrach and
S.J. Nelson (yes, moral qualms anent privacy invasion; albeit wherein wrote
it better yesterday than possible today due to receiving long phone call at
2:30am, sacrifices we all have to make):
>serious mistakes last week. First, Steve Mizrach, today, was mostaccurate
>in replying to that Thursday night or Friday morning post as a farce. It
>had been intended as a "faux flame," intended to convey to the general
>readership the impression or rather the *experience* of a flame, butwhich
>was so full of yiddishisms as to be *incomprehensible*. To SteveMizrach,
>on the other hand, the intended message was, "here is how to be
>'countercultural,' whatever that means, or at least countersubcultural
>in the present case: outrage conventions in a noncustomary fashion and
>sample the confusion afterwards." Which might have worked, had the tone
>been sustained throughout and been just a bit lighter. But in the last
>paragraph, I got phony-chivalrous and, hence, *serious*, which reversed
>the tee-hee affect wherewith most of the thing was written. This was
>poor.
The research tactic of perpetrating a selective or provocative normviola-
tion in a subculture to test normative boundaries or very existence of anorm
was, in the hands of H. Garfinkel, called the "happening." This, to be sure,
was nowhere near so well-planned, if planned at all; no research design so
much as a why-not. Sorry if you were one of the people more disconcertedthan
appeared to have been usual.
If still angry, or whatever, please write me.
----------------------- END INCLUDED TEXT-----------------------------------
The deliberate perpetration of an exploratory norm violation in my
behavioral repertory, usually in anticipation of the slightly bizarre but
of no substantive damage, is a prank I used to play during the 1960s, though
I shy away from the actual word "countercultural," given its associationswith
a successful competitor, Theodor Roszak. More usually, that is, in my normal
or standard condition, I am mentally retarded in social behavioracquisition,
with rapid extinction; this is somehow linked to lifelong cerebral palsythough
exactly how is unknown. (Extraordinarily rapid extinction also occurs.) The
upshot of all this is that I'm likelier to be oblivious to sociobehavioral
norms, that is, appropriate behavior; also to fail to "pick up on" subtle
normative cues that others apparently learn as if by osmosis. As well to
be able to parody this or that detail of social behavior easier than I can
learn the appropriate version. Hence the eagerness to indulge in a bit of
farce *modo flamo* (if defective in execution).
I should tell you that, during the Divine Light Mission study previously
mentioned on ANTHRO-L, Ralph Larkin used me as a sort of "social normdowsing
rod": When, during "indoctrination" *satsang* we were told, "There are no
rules in Guru Maharaj Ji," for example, well, you can be very damned sure
that, without the slightest effort or intention on my part, I pretty much
found and broke them all. Or as many as could have possibly applied. It
is still, everywhere, one of my least-wanted gifts: For all I know, I am
part of the woodwork. All around me in the vicinity, no matter what sort of
vicnity it might be, uneasily sense or infer elsewise. Wish that wasParanoid,
so help me, I truly do, but it's not.
Cheers,
DAF
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 46
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 23:22:17 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: stellar performance all around sjn
To: "Stephanie J. Nelson" <NELSON@>
Message-Id: <940127.232217.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
As I beheld with awe your charges and adeptations thereof in the face of
findings by my blue ribbon committee of experts, never loosening a single
muscle of your prehensile jaw's vicelike grip on the pure essence of the
Demands for the negotiated defeat of the Enemy, necessarily me, I wasawestruck
with admiration. Not even wife #2, stupid nitwit junkie that she was, by use
of sheer animal cunning, could turn in such a performance without hardly
trying. (You were also composing two posts at least to ANTHRO-L alone, which
took even less trying. Though I'm determined to have another look; surely
there are hidden depths. For the percipient card-carrying woman to discern.)
What do you know about male Paranoia? Only Michael S. Kimmel, in theFullness
of Professorship thanks to his hot new Theory of Men, which I must tell to
the poster who wanted such information (also by same author: Men's Lives).
I have reread the previous letter and have concluded that, insane as it
was, it should remain unedited in my Collected Letters (no, I do *not* do
such things or entertain trashy delusions of this nature) due to its
*authenticity*, whereof I do not know the meaning, as generated in the lower
manhattan art world, of "authenticity" this week. The flaterry? That is far
better authenticated as *sincerely* felt. We two, and all over the world
tonight, there are Explainers who readily Explain whether any listen or not
that all such authenticity and sincerity is socially formed, clotted,
constructed [of course], hence is to be doubted, deepdown dubious, nomatter
how emotionally Real. But they are my fraudulent feelings as I have self-
deceived myself as to have felt them. Take them for the simulacra they are,
let them be hyperreal to me. (Ah, pseudohood, in my old age; I see heaven's
rays beconing, schwing low sweet chariot, Achilles gwine in Vietnam.)
A small prose for a text-enterer, a lousy prose for the reader, amagnifi-
cent piece of writing for the one who need not read it; wasn't meant to; is
peripheral to my assurance I'm the measure of her, she deserves me. (What
has she *done*, the nonexistent great green goddess has passed this evil
decree?)
Enough of you, vile temptress-by-supreme-cognition. I must turn to my
goddess-given. Mary Daly blessings upon her, upon me, upon thee, who hath
consecrated the union of the unemployable PhDs.
Real, if not in least objectively real,
DAF
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 1994 22:08:58 CST
From: <U28550%UICVM@>
To: <dfoss@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Subject: reply
I had a private correspondence with David Heller, and find him to be awhiney,
self-absorbed little wimp who deserves not the slightest empathy. He livesto
be offended, and anything will do. Once that became clear, I told him never
to darken my screen again. Assholes like him bring out the worst in me. I
think you may be going through a phase where you're taking events of the NET
more seriously than you ought to. It is no coincidence, however, that this
occurs immediately after the four most lucid, beautifully organized essaysthat
I have seen in that few words anywhere ever. (prompting my "on a roll"comment)
It is very difficult to do that sort of work and have it greeted with the
underwhelming superficiality of many of our Netmates. I have been lurking
through most of that thread--just a quickie here and there--and am veryloathe
to enter that discussion, having just finished a book where I professed aview
of culture that got me in a brief but very biting exchange with WardGoodenough
(who wrote the Foreword for the book). He has not been pleased with mesince.
I would not engage in that sort of discussion, frankly, with the likes of
Mizrach, Nelson, zeke, and even Graber and O'Brien (who is hustling, Ithink).
It would be a waste of time.
Meanwhile, I had a bizzare but very funny exchange with Carrier, who was
pleased at my (minor) plug for his academic humor. Of course, he missed the
point of my reference to him altogether--does anyone think that this humoris
not ethnic? Without being explicit, what I really meant was that this is
archetypical goyische humor. But James wrote back and was very funny,giving
me a wonderful idea for doing something even more tasteless than playingbass
in a bluegrass band. I'm going to take digital images of the front and back
covers of my book and have them made up as the front and back of a T-shirt,
which I am going to sell at the Oceania meetings. I only wish that my band
had enough tunes in the can to do a CD with the same title as the book.That
would be the quintessence of shamelessness, the Scarlet Letter.
Meanwhile, I would worry a little less about the folks on the Net, most
of whom couldn't carry your briefcase, and not be gun shy. Remember that
most of the people who read your stuff grew up with TV and are not used to
mining the written word, particularly when it is longer than a sound byte.
As James Carrier said, What did all those satirists do before TV? Maybe
people will get used to reading again. They need to chuckle a bit more, and
so do you and I.
Mike
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 19:56:09 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: gilgamesh & enkiddu lurch around the jungle and the disma
l swamp
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 166
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 94 15:48:52 EST
From: "Daniel A. Foss" <DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: fedex passenger pigeon delivery service clandestine msg
To: "Reed D. Riner" <rdr@>
Message-Id: <940128.154852.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Dear Reed D. Riner:
For the duration of the Present Time Frame, please consider the present
message a Revelation from the Realm of Ethernets which doth communicatetwixt
themselves, any Thingie at all, I've said it once I've said it a thousand
times, is allowed a Self unto its ownself so long as I can get out of it,
by the exclusive means of goddessgiven Internet. Now, down to business, the
Protocol Book says very clearly that there has got to be "serious religious
stuff" before getting down to, you know, intellectual fun and games, I mean,
this is not like before, when I could say things and you could say things
with both of us *making fools of ourselves without having to do it during
mumbojumbo preliminaries prior to the embarassing main event*. The Great
Green Mother Goddess of the Cretins does not allow those easygoing ways in
the spirit world, so get to know it. <Ready on the set!>
In the name of Goddess the maternal the nurturing who createth that other
gender from drops of menstrual blood!
Recite!
Look, man, the TAs recite, you lecture, Down There. No, I don't mean what
"down there" means in feminist novels whose protagonists have flashbacks to
"when I was little." What is meant by Recite! in this Revelation is, you
*declaim*, look it up, *verse* is Classical English, as was spoken,subsequent-
ly reconstructed by scholars entirely wrong, in the State of Arizona, great
in Highways, in 1994, announcing the imminence of the Great Singularity,
circled on certain initiated calendars for Jan 1, 2012.
Oh, this is your camel. Get to know it.
Now, let's relax. In the next life, your time is not your own. Of what
little yet glimmers interest in the bizarre doings among you, uh, *living*,
as you misconstrue themselves, there looms large the Book of McCreery, where
behold it is Written:
"(1) The existence of 'us' vs. 'them' distinctions is prima-facie evidence
that a culture exists, and
"(2) That job No. 1 for ethnographers is trying to sort out theassumptions
behind the existence of 'us.'" (JLMcCreery, What's it all about, Wed, 26Jan)
Yet not the merest *twinkied trice* prior to the foregoing two thirds of
a ringing declaration, there was posted, nay, nailed to the door of thine
Academic Wittenberg, the AWOL declaration posted by the usual would-be
heresiarch or instigator of mass-desertion the slinking off whereof the
community of these blase times hardly bothers to dignify with a yawn. With
customary, almost prescriptive tediousness, the perpetrator, soi-disant
"real name" omitted yet more intimate <userid>, <mshere@>,
unconcealed, has entitled the futile gesture, "good-bye." Quel horreur.
The departing mystery poster, Michael by signature, is following tradition
in initiating the *hijra* of a "we," it invariably happens, and in departure
launches that Parthian shot against a targeted "they," however construed.
And the construction here indicates quite a vivid imagination, which should
find more profitable outlets in the fast-growing industry on the Clinton
Assassination, intended to be the first assassination with full media
preparation in advance. (For those following my comic strip down below, the
Medical-Industrial Complex had been blowing hot and cold for the full year
since the inauguration, but at the time I passed on was blowing distincly
hot again.) "Michael" indisputably targeted a "they"; said "they" was farmore
distinctively delineated than any "we" posited or announced as in revolt
against the "they" in question:
>that asshole Foss and his bonehead cohorts. I am still interested in
Who are these bonehead cohorts? I suggest the social or just plain Paranoid
construction of a clique or cabal of bonehead cohorts out of, given the
context, the round-robin succession of posts of comments by given bonehead
cohorts of prior posts by Foss or other bonehead cohorts. If the community
should concur in the suggested list, or add names missing here or subtract
those incongruously listed, this would be a great help, most notably in the
rigor of formulating a valid boundary definition of the "they" we wish to
identify, not *qua* they, but *qua* notional they as - presumably vaguely -
fancied by Michael. The fact that said they have nothing really in common,
do not like each other, or would summon police and neighborhood watchersshould
their notional leader, Foss, materialize at their homes is not relevant.
My starter list would include:
Foss [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 priori excluded
from the suggested starter list, e.g., Susan Love Brown.
[Note: My test studio audience for the intended-farcical, if flawed, "faux
flame" of Seeker1/Mizrach, who is Jewish, grad student in microeconomics,and
of family background inclusive of successive refugee emigrations from Moscow
to Belgrade, then Belgrade to New York City, quite nearly fell out of his
chair reading the offending document, even the flawed and incongruously
chivalrous defense of Doctress Neuotpia's honour. Only one piece ofbackground
assistance appeared to be necessary: the mention of the publication circa1956
of the bizarre America As A Civilization by Max Lerner, 2 vols., paper.]
[[To the reader: The foregoing is part of my ongoing accumulation ofdocumen-
tary accumulation for exculpatory purposes against the Curse of Tiammat,Earth
Cracker, She To Whom All Faults Belong, In Whose Hands Reposeth Mighty San
Andreas.]]
To continue: If the "they," by dialectical antithesis also a "we," is of
notional importance, minimally existing where not wholly imaginary and, as
I suggest here, constructed of guilt by *contiguity*, far less evidential,
normally, than guilt by *association*, then it is incumbent upon McCreery to
make a few qualifications here, tinkerings under the hood there. It is by
no means unusual for a society or community to split up ad hoc intoseemingly
bitter enemies; the enmity in question strictly time-delimited or low-key,
below threshold of awareness, between scheduled events: The alternatesacking
of Normal OK or Austin TX year after year. The "Battle of the Sexes" ritual
among the Ndembu (Turner, 1969) culminating in an orgy; the highlyreminiscent
Hock Day (first monday and tuesday after the first sunday after Easter)bondage
orgy in English peasant villages in the 15th century (Kendall, The Yorkist
Age) in metaphorically celebrating the commutation of forced labour services
for cash); colour wars in summer camps; and the chariot fans in Justinian's
Late Antique cities who combined into a revolutionary force having composed
their team allegiances, Blue vs Green, to combine against the State; the
mutual estrangement, in New York City, of Bronx people from Brooklyn people;
and every sort of we-theyness failing to coincide with what we are familiar
with. (Then you can get to what differentiates partisans of the Cubbies and
Chisox; and someday I'll reveal how I was the *only* traitor to my ethnic
heritage in the Hebrew school by reason of being for the Yankees. Why was I
for the Yankees? Because my father was. Ask him, may he rest in peace.)
Those of the functionalist persuasion, they breed like rabbits, cannot
be exterminated, assert that the reproduction of we-theyness reinvigorates
stale or tedious social life; it's applicable to "a ritual, a rite," as
Parsons considered elections fundamentally good for; to the steady stream
Bad Guys whose violent annihilation primetime television exhibitspredictably;
and competition between nationally advertised name brands or nationallyknown
Logos of global firms. (Notional pricecuts or manufacturers rebatesrestimulate
PC vs Mac tribal loyalties, rationalizations, and wonderings as to whether
too much compatibility is such a good thing after all.)
Not even violence such that, eg, commitment to one's condition as Blood
or Crip is just about hereditary, and everpresent to the point ofhabituation
to the likelihood, even Normality, of one's violent death, hardly renders
Bloods and Crips of different cultures.
Let's have John McCreery, elsewise someone else, respond to this question
of notional, even delusional, distinctions, those in eye of beholder as well
as those which make no difference, before I relay the word of Inanna on this
question or, as I'd have to say among the living, "offer my own opinion."
The foregoing essay, of Divine Inspiration, has been released to thepriests
of Inanna by the priestesses of Inanna with instructions from the goddess to
get rid of the goddam thing among humans, and pronto. All duplicationwithout
authorization of the Temple of Inanna, as this is, must be in full, without
textual emendation or editing.
Inannna tells us, There is use for the Truth for one purpose only, the
demolition (in idol form), annihilation, and obliteration of the Deviant
Deity, Tiammat. Elsewise, lies serve just as well, look at Tiammat; why
any other goddesses lose out of obedience to stupid rules and constraints.
Daniel A. Foss
Friday, Feb 21, 3102 BC
<addressee and reasons for selection of addressee are governed byguidance
of Inanna; if of service in struggle against Tiammat, that's cool, elsewise,
no sweat, man>
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 22:36:53 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: letter to an anthropologist regarding class war against
...Foss:
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 128
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 94 21:25:15 EST
From: DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Subject: nonpost to anthro-l; necessity to wage another tedious cl
To: Mike Lieber <U28550@>
Resent-Message-Id: <940128.212515.EST.DFOSS@ccvm.sunysb.edu>
...class war:
Mike,
After last saturday's debacle, I decided to take a powder for anothercouple
of months. This should have been implemented on Friday, that is, Jan 21.What
burned so much I didn't feel strongly enough about restraining myself wasthe
post by Stephanie J. Nelson in response to the "gainesville" farce. The dual
intent behind the post aimed at seeker1, what I called a "faux flame," you
have already seen.
(To review, the intent was for the ANTRHO-L readership as
a whole to, pardon the expression, *experience* the deliberate assault upon
"political correctness," more vulnerable here than it is among sociologists
whose rigid posturings when any offense to the code is essayed is daunting,
as a *farce*, and moreover, an incomprehensible farce larded withyiddishisms
of an archaising character, generationally inappropriate. The defect in
execution, in the last paragraph, is regrettable because it changes thetone.
Even so, it's so outlandish, my tryout "studio audience" here is unable to
detect it. The intent was to illustrate, concretely, to seeker1/S. Mizrach
that one cannot be "deliberately countercultural," whatever that means, and
I am terribly sorry but I refuse to use that execrable word counterculture,
which was invented by my successful competitor, Theodor Roszak, it isnecessary
to offend sensibilities, to a degree, so long as nobody gets hurt. The only
way to violate the limits or the straitjacket confinement of political
correctness is to do it. But do it in a way so as to indicate that it's
safe, "cool," for everyone else to do it, and throw a few custard pies into
the bargain. How do these people expect to objectify other culturies yet not
objectify their own? What disappointed me was the inadequacy of some people
for this task. Not to mention Stephanie J. Nelson's spurious charge ofracism.
Assuming the worst but this time acting, perhaps overnaively, as if I
expected true liberality from the Liberals and authentic civility from the
Civilized, I did indeed undertake on Thursday, Jan 27, yesterday, anelaborate
charade wherein I enacted every possible authentically faked indication of
self-abasement before Ms Nelson in hopes of arriving at a deal. (Forgiveness
was out of the ballpark.)
You recall that the original instigation, the "gainesville" post, was
intended to fracture the palsied and frozen-over style of presentation,
viz, High Academic Style, with its political-correctness ratsnest, perverse
rewarding - it's gone way beyond indulgence - of obfuscatory obscurantism
(the effect whereof has the function if not the intention of inculcating
a sense of stupidity, inferiority, and one's foreordained Place in the lout
who innocently stumbles into such an exhibitionistic exhibition ofundetectably
erroneous reasoning with all outward appearance of Reason.
Ah, Marx, you were better off unborn: "Objective rationality exists in
every social order; but it is not always rational in form."
The e-mail/listserv list is the worst-imaginable medium for innovation of
new social theory. Some people alas have language processing problems which
preclude use of any other medium, so lousy as it is for their purposes,which
is to say, my purpose, I have no other. While no genius, and I'll even admit
to Retarded, I've not gone unexposed to printed matter; and somehow got a
PhD notwithstanding Retardation as evidence of the inexorable bruteunthinking
force of Jewishmotherpower executing its program on inappropriate inputswith
socially undigestable consequences. (Note, I have Cerebral Palsy, whereof a
symptom is aphasia. Also, there are global microbehavioral deficits whichhad
I the wit to be aware of them I'd have prevented or stifled them long ago.)
So I've gone on with the thing, with no hope of publishing in journals,
no hope of even being credited with cognition, and getting involved, even
over the Net, in social situations which presuppose normal social behavior
acquisition, which doesn't exist else I'd be upper middle class like the
career academics the trouble arises with; whence normal or standard social
behavior inventory; whence unproblematic social interaction, which cannot
exist.
In despite of the folk saying, I do quite distinctly inform the people on
any list that, "I'm the Dog here." To have anything to hide would entail my
entanglement in situations I'd be unable to handle when they came up, hence
I attempt to induce reduced expectations for upper middle class sociability
and narrowing of focus to whatever I am trying to say. The reverse, needless
to say, is the rule.
The "gainesville" post (again):
To repeat, I had little doubt before the current unpleasantness, and none
whatever now, that S.J. Nelson is currying prestige and popularity byexcising
me from the list, fumigate the list so to speak, to restore its monoclassal
character. The same ugly animus underlying the Hardwick episode, wherehowever,
Hardwick was complicit with his own purge.
The documentation of this follows in the file, ZANG3 SCRIPT B. The facts
mentioned by myself in the series of exchanges with Stephanie J. Nelson are
all and without exception True. The affect evinced by myself in any and all
dealings with Stephanie J. Nelson, not excepting the mooning-adolescent awe
expressed in the final letter, are False. I make this distinction because I
never lie on matters of fact, being ever afraid of detection. With affect,
I rely on my emotional primitivism and inadequacy to shield me fromdetection
by more mature adults.
I am 53 years old, I should have said.
You will see that the correspondence with Stephanie J. Nelson was wholly
futile; her objective was exaction of voluntary withdrawl cum abject apology
to not least Alvarado, who objectively speaking is irrelevant to the whole
dispute and did not even read the offending post.
The file ZANG2 SCRIPT B is a post I would have sent to ANTHRO-L. Withsome
embellishments. Tiammat is Stephanie J. Nelson. No real person correspondsto
Inanna, who will probably, in future versions of the story, evolve intoanother
Stephanie J. Nelson. The argument is intended as serious.
FNORD-L consists of confrontational nihilists. I have posted the two long
files (don't worry, nobody ever heard of you and your problems with Heller)
to yet another list of even worse nihilists, DONKEY-L. These people are not
under my control or even their own. They may be too self absorbed to do
anything to ANTHRO-L to avenge my class persecution (frankly, I am too angry
to care at this time whether I come across as psychotic or whatever epithet
you may choose); who knows.
Having found the way of the Devil ineffectual, I resort to the way of the
Deep Blue Sea. I regret that it has come to this, though on past experience
I am unable to imagine what it is that it has come to.
Cheers, or should I say, Sincerely, under the grave circumstances of the
occasion,
Daniel A. Foss
Previous Index Next