THOMAS BRADY TAKES THE CHRISTOPHER WOODMAN CHALLENGE

woody

1) You have been accused of not finding any value in poetry, how do you respond? Has your life been enriched in any way by your familiarity with poetry or is it just something to pass the time for you?

No value. No enrichment.

2) What, in your mind, is the point of Scarriet? Is it to improve poetry or to wallow in its failings? Is it something else entirely? Can you link to anything Tom has written that is indicative of the spirit of Scarriet as well as being substantial, based on concrete points and in some way worthwhile?

Wallow. No link is worthwhile.

3) How do you respond to charges that Tom is nothing but a common internet troll? Is such an assessment fair or unfair, and why?

Fair.

4) How do you justify the hyper-reductive view of literature Tom presents here (that literature be purely sentimental and that his reviews need not be based on facts or even on having finished reading the work he is purporting to review)? Are you content merely to pass off Tom’s crude speculations as facts? Why or why not?

Crude speculations and no justification for them.

5) Tom has repeatedly attacked Bernstein’s “Official Verse Culture” and Silliman’s “School of Quietude” for being too vague but his own attacks on “incoherent” poetry are just as vague (perhaps more so). What do you think about this seeming hypocrisy?

I am quiet, incoherent—and hypocritical.

6) Where do you realistically see poetry going in the 21st century? Where would you ideally like to see poetry going in the 21st century? What has Scarriet done to help facilitate any forward movement?

Towards the 22nd century.  Nothing.

I am happy to report, however, that Scarriet visits this month, April 2011, will exceed the visits of our first 6 months, September 2009 thru February 2010.  We’re blind, but we’re headed for glory. –Thom. Brady

Advertisements

30 Comments

  1. Aaron Asphar said,

    April 21, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    A little advice: throwing ‘challenge’ or ‘competition’ in everything only appeals to reified egoists like yourself, and they are a dwindling populous: most of them go into finance as they become pure psychopaths.

  2. Nooch said,

    April 21, 2011 at 7:30 pm

    OK, I’m less well educated
    Than the lowliest aestheticist—
    But this post reminds me of the “climax”
    Of Michel Tournier’s “The Fetishist.”

    I’ll “Excerpt support” it
    And unwind it
    If, that is, I
    Can ever find it.

  3. Mark said,

    April 21, 2011 at 10:38 pm

    “I am happy to report, however, that Scarriet visits this month, April 2011, will exceed the visits of our first 6 months”

    Most of those are me and the rest are just people who are enjoying watching you cry while you get your ass kicked. You’re so proud of having made a spectacle of yourself. I called you an attention-whore a few weeks ago. How right I was.

    This post, in addition to being lazy, is not good enough, Tom.
    Come on over to “About Scarriet” and let’s have a talk.

    Mark

    • April 22, 2011 at 1:26 am

      The last time Scarriet had such a surge was in February and March 2010. That was the period in which there was so much intellectual energy on the site, and boy did the fine sparks jump — and I don’t mean for baskets either. Indeed, the whole joint was jumping with outrage and poetry furor, there were so many fiercely engaged commentators — including you, of course , Tom, and eventually, to some extent, Bob Tonucci.

      Do you remember?

      And there was March Madness too, the Scarriet sideshow that became the main act, and by the middle of April there remained just the two of you, you and Bob — who by that time had morphed from Nooch through the Noochi-Coochie Man to the Noochinator and on to Poem Support, Link Support and every other remaining supporter.

      The numbers stayed up for awhile in April and May, so many people couldn’t believe that this could really be the end of the saga. As the site got more and more knee-jerk and reductive, frantically seeking that one last irresistible fix that would bring back the hay-days of “Pop Goes the Weasel” (February 21st, 2010), “Why Keats ‘Ode to Psyche’ Doesn’t Work” (March 14, 2010), “Ich Weiss Nicht” (March 28th, 2010) and the original-Scarriet swan-song, “The Adoration of Anything You Think you Own is Fire” (April 11th, 2010), the crowds moved away to warmer, more engaging and sustainable fires.

      They’ve just come back for the spectacle of the old fire rekindled at Scarriet, and the increase in the stats has been exponential, which Tom loves. But if he doesn’t get serious about Mark’s questions, Scarriet’s soon going to burn itself out all over again.

      Christopher

      • April 22, 2011 at 1:59 am

        The questions are Mark’s, not mine, of course — and this post is just Brady using another of his avoidance techniques, make it look as if Christopher’s asking because of course Christopher’s just jealous.

        Get over to About Scarriet, Tom — this little flutter won’t work either.

        (Watch out for the sentimentality next, guys, and self-pity’s also in the quiver.)

        Mark’s questions, Tom — over at About Scarriet.

        Christopher

      • Mark said,

        April 22, 2011 at 2:35 am

        hehe

        Christopher knows what’s going on just like everyone else does, Tom. This cowardly routine is very transparent. Maybe Gary feels bad that you’re finally getting a taste of your own medicine but no one else does.

        So “About Scarriet,” what say you?

  4. Nooch said,

    April 21, 2011 at 11:01 pm

    Brady seems Genet-ian here,
    Or perhaps I’m being Rorshachian—
    No wait, I have it—Brady here’s
    Indisputably Arnold Horschackian.

    Kotter, the Sweathogs,
    And Principal Woodman—
    As a symbol for Scarriet
    It may be a good one.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welcome_Back,_Kotter

    • Mark said,

      April 21, 2011 at 11:05 pm

      I wish Tom would stop showing up with a note from his mother to try and get out of having a debate with me.

      • Nooch said,

        April 22, 2011 at 7:43 am

        His mom? That gives me pause,
        Though I don’t think that it oughta—
        More true to call me Scar’yet’s
        Non-athletic supporter.

      • Mark said,

        April 22, 2011 at 8:04 am

        I would never badmouth you Nooch – your poems are the only thing that make Scarriet worth reading!*

        I was referring to:
        Epstein’s catchphrase: “Hey, Mr. Kotter, I got a note!”

        *Your dominatrix poem a couple days ago made me literally laugh out loud.

      • Nooch said,

        April 22, 2011 at 8:15 am

        Phew! I feared I’d gone
        In your estimation
        From a boxful of puppies
        To belly-up guppies!
        Hail Scar’yet Nation!

      • Nooch said,

        April 22, 2011 at 8:39 am

        Of course you mean:
        Juan Luis Pedro Philippo DeHuevos Epstein.
        A fiercely proud Puerto Rican Jew,
        Around campus a big man—
        His father was Puerto Rican;
        His mother’s name was Bibbermann.

        Epstein was like Chico Marx,
        Horshack like Harpo (though he talked)—
        Barbarino, the leader, a Groucho of sorts,
        And Washington like Zeppo (‘ceptin the way he walked).

  5. Excerpt support said,

    April 21, 2011 at 11:04 pm

    I think there is a terrible danger in the over-cultivation of one’s sensibilities, and that’s what poets are forced to do in order to be poets. You will find that poets, almost without exception, are cast into the most abject despair over things that wouldn’t bother an ordinary person at all. Living with such an exacerbating mind and sensibility gets to be something that one cannot bear any longer. In order to create poetry, you make a monster out of your own mind. You can’t get rid of him. He stays right with you every minute. Every minute of every day and every night. He produces terrible things—nightmare after nightmare. I’m subject to having them no less than any of the rest of them. But I don’t fool myself. I know what’s doing it. Writers start out taking something to aid the monster, to give them the poetry. Poets use alcohol, or any other kind of stimulant, to aid and abet this process, then eventually take refuge in the alcohol to help get rid of it. But by that time the monster is so highly developed he cannot be got rid of.

    — from a Playboy interview with James Dickey, 1973

    • thomasbrady said,

      April 22, 2011 at 3:29 am

      Dickey fought in WW II. That will create a monster in your brain, I guess…

      • james bagger said,

        April 22, 2011 at 2:50 pm

        boredom was rimbaud’s excuse.

      • thomasbrady said,

        April 22, 2011 at 3:24 pm

        Was Rimbaud bored with poetry? Himself? Everything?

  6. Professor Marvel said,

    April 22, 2011 at 12:25 am

    As for you, my galvanized friend, you want a heart. You don’t know how lucky you are not to have one. Hearts will never be practical until they can be made unbreakable.

    Glinda, the Good Witch of the North: You have no power here! Begone, before somebody drops a house on you, too!

    • Wfkammann said,

      April 22, 2011 at 2:13 am

      Thom,
      Just the kind of honest well-thought-out answers I would have expected from you. You probably think people will think, “But he couldn’t be that bad? Could he??” If only there were a penalty fit for the crime of your failure to answer. Where’s the Snicker Snee when you need it?

  7. Christopher Woodman said,

    April 24, 2011 at 4:17 am

    I keep looking at the graphic that introduces this article — and I like it because I really like wheels and I really like women . And needless to say, I really like the color purple too.

    The three articles I provide clicks for here give a good idea of what my relationship with Tom Brady has been like in the past — troubled but creative. And I think that’s been good. Indeed, I’m absolutely certain that when the stats go up for Scarriet, like now, it’s because the site is more troubled and creative – troubled and creative, mind you, not just troubled. Purple cars and boobs are a dime a dozen on the net, as are trolls, huff-and-puff artists, and gossips. When Scarriet became just troll, huff-and-puff and gossip as it did during the first March Madness series it lost its edge, its uniqueness and its value, and everybody left including me.

    Only Tom was left, and that’s not proved enough despite all the talent he’s got. There’s no juice to suck in the site, and despite all the heat there’s no warmth, poetry or vitality.

    A few troubled nerds joined in from time to time after everybody else left, it’s true, but as soon as the creativity came back and lightened up the trouble, they vanished.

    No sign of them now for sure.

    So I’m still not quite sure where Tom’s purple car and girl are coming from, and how they might constitute a “challenge” to me, his ex-partner, Christopher Woodman. I also don’t get the sense of the “answers” Tom provides to the questions at all. Because, of course, they’re not my questions but Mark’s — though I’m certainly interested to hear the answers which, it seems to me, simply have to be frank and relevant.

    I suspect the purple car and girl article and its joke answers were an attempt to derail the questioning process, so I’m glad the tracks are so well nailed down and the engineer so steady on the throttle!

    Finally, I would say not all is lost if Tom can listen, take it in, and use his very considerable talents better. My feeling is that each of his recent March Madness articles is a nail not in his railroad but in his coffee. And I think Tom knows that. There isn’t even any fun in the war games anymore, just silly walks and raspberries.

    Christopher

  8. April 25, 2011 at 1:43 am

    I posted the following late last night and didn’t realize it did not go into the thread I intended until I reread it this morning. So I’m reposting it here where it obviously belongs as a personal response to the “Christopher Woodman Challenge.”

    Because what I say here isn’t “About Scarriet” at all, you see. It’s about Tom and me. Yet I’ve never met Tom and still know almost nothing about him, his personal life, how old he is, even what work he does. Yes, I know where he works but can’t imagine what he does there, as his job is unrelated to poetry. But most mysterious of all, I can’t imagine what motivates Tom to be so uniquely in-your-face and obstructive when he’s talking about what he obviously knows and loves best — poetry!

    That’s really peculiar — and though I’ve worked very closely with him now on six separate sites, and as his partner on this last one, I still can’t get my mind around the bitterness and anger that overwhelm Tom whenever he talks about modern poetry — and I mean all poetry written after c. 1900!

    I’ve edited just one word, “Edward” to “Edgar” — I really am getting old!

    ~

    Dear friend Tom,
    If you always play on your silly strengths and nothing more, old friends like me will come along and say you make them throw up.

    You can do Lists with your eyes shut — the 100 Best of This or That, and then Another 100, and Yet 100 More — with your good Nooch along to fill out the glorification-of-poets-and-poetry details as if everyone were so excited, and following your remarkably fertile poetry-mind with still bated breath. Whereas what you really want is, admit it, just to be a poet, just to be a poet still in love.

    The fact is your memory and your wit are your slave-masters, and they’ve squeezed you into a tiny tight niche where only you can function at such speed — and it’s your prison, and it’s called Scarriet, and it’s entirely devoid of companions and admirers.

    But you’re so much bigger than that, Tom, what with your wife and your lovely children and your poetry, baseball and music. Why do you just want to be poetry’s Arnold Shwarzenegger, and pump your muscles up bigger than all the others and pretend that your the crowned King of Poetry-Pops — the most popular, the most unflappable, with the fastest critical dick ever flashed on Parnassus at high noon?

    Take a deep breath and pull back, Tom. Take a deep breath, touch the earth, and admit how difficult it is to write poetry at all, and how hard we all try — and still we can’t do it. And I mean almost all of us who have the courage to try.

    No poet worth his salt doesn’t feel this way, Tom, with the possible exception of William Shakespeare and Edgar Guest.

    So come down, Tom.

    Cry, Tom.

    Cry, Mr Wizard of Oz behind your chintz curtain.

    Cry for those innocents strung up on your clothes line in Ithaca.

    Christopher

  9. April 26, 2011 at 6:37 am

    Dear Everybody,
    I respect very much that you’ve left this space open, and I thank you for your tact.

    I also respect the responsibility this places on me.

    But it’s so difficult to know what to say to Tom next. Even though I feel I’m right to appeal to him directly, I can’t imagine how he could reply honestly without crying. And after you start crying like that there’s no quick way to stop, and of course when you do stop and get back to where you were you’re not the same person anymore. And that’s dire.

    That’s the most important thing I have to say straight off.

    ~

    Secondly, I was very interested in Bill Carpenter’s suggestion that Tom start a new career as a stand-up comedian at poetry conferences and readings, but I don’t think Bill has any idea just how deep Tom’s bitterness goes. Stand-up comedians aren’t appreciated who bring the whole house down quite literally, and quite literally the whole house right on down to before Ezra Pound was born. That’s not funny any more in a poetry context — that gets boring.

    Bill Carpenter also said ( April 25, 2011 at 10:37 am ):

    Tom likes the drama… He is a performance artist, he has a real gift for it beyond and beside his entertaining content. At some point he will feel he has run through his anti-modernist material and leave it behind, along with his advocacy for Poe and Shelley. Kevin mocks Tom for letting himself get beaten up in public, but as Ishmael sort of says, there’s substance to someone who let’s himself be laughed at. The Woodman Challenge post was inspired, suggesting there is a whole vein of Dostoyevskyan self-abasement waiting for Tom to mine.

    And that’s something — and I do hope Tom hears it. Indeed, not an insignificant number of would-be artists have survived this passage to become good, and some even great.

    I myself quit writing poetry as a school boy at 17 because I so distrusted myself, how I could lie, manipulate words, imitate styles and fabricate images, like a ‘Mad Man’ indeed — and that really did happen to me in 1957. I only felt humble enough, and broken enough too, to start again at 50.

    All that remains now at 71 is to get good.

    ~

    I think for me the most horrible moment of all on Scarriet was when Tom put up this. I think the flippant insensitivity to my objections in the comments shows just how entrenched Tom actually is in his niche. He just doesn’t see or hear what is more care what he says.

    That’s why stonewalling Mark is so easy for him. On the other hand, Mark is in bed to the end of the month, so there’s still hope. Tom has still got the chance to build on the opportunity Mark is so generously offering him, lucky guy.

    How many of us are so lucky to be pursued by such an angel?

    Christopher

    • thomasbrady said,

      April 26, 2011 at 12:54 pm

      I’m very glad Mark is here.

      But let’s put this phantom to rest, once and for all:

      I’m not “stonewalling” Mark, or avoiding his serious questions. I will not reply to things like, “What do you say to the charge that you are a liar?”

      The Silliman v. Collins issue has been done to death, and my original point rings loud, clear and true; as for the Romantics v. Modernists discussion, that was cut short by Mark, with me leading 2-0. Everything else has been Mark’s rancor against my reason.

      But, bring it on, whatever. I can handle it.

  10. April 26, 2011 at 6:40 am

    Dear Everybody,
    I respect very much that you’ve left this space open, and I thank you for your tact.

    I also respect the responsibility this places on me.

    But it’s so difficult to know what to say to Tom next. Even though I feel I’m right to appeal to him directly, I can’t imagine how he could reply honestly without crying. And after you start crying like that there’s no quick way to stop, and of course when you do stop and get back to where you were you’re not the same person anymore. And that’s dire.

    That’s the most important thing I have to say straight off.

    ~

    Secondly, I was very interested in Bill Carpenter’s suggestion that Tom start a new career as a stand-up comedian at poetry conferences and readings, but I don’t think Bill has any idea just how deep Tom’s bitterness goes. Stand-up comedians aren’t appreciated who bring the whole house down quite literally, and quite literally the whole house right on down to before Ezra Pound was born. That’s not funny any more in a poetry context — that gets boring.

    Bill Carpenter also said ( April 25, 2011 at 10:37 am ):

    Tom likes the drama… He is a performance artist, he has a real gift for it beyond and beside his entertaining content. At some point he will feel he has run through his anti-modernist material and leave it behind, along with his advocacy for Poe and Shelley. Kevin mocks Tom for letting himself get beaten up in public, but as Ishmael sort of says, there’s substance to someone who let’s himself be laughed at. The Woodman Challenge post was inspired, suggesting there is a whole vein of Dostoyevskyan self-abasement waiting for Tom to mine.

    And that’s something — and I do hope Tom hears it. Indeed, not an insignificant number of would-be artists have survived this passage to become good, and some even great.

    I myself quit writing poetry as a school boy at 17 because I so distrusted myself, how I could lie, manipulate words, imitate styles and fabricate images, like a ‘Mad Man’ indeed — and that really did happen to me in 1957. I only felt humble enough, and broken enough too, to start again at 50.

    All that remains now at 71 is to get good.

    ~

    I think for me the most horrible moment of all on Scarriet was when Tom put up this. I think the flippant insensitivity to my objections in the comments shows just how entrenched Tom actually is in his niche. He just doesn’t see or hear what is more care what he says.

    That’s why stonewalling Mark is so easy for him. On the other hand, Mark is in bed to the end of the month, so there’s still hope. Tom has still got the chance to build on the opportunity Mark is so generously offering him, lucky guy.

    How many of us are so lucky to be pursued by such an angel?

    Christopher

  11. April 26, 2011 at 6:52 am

    [Editor: Now both previous attempts have disappeared so I’m trying again. Oh, and do check your spam settings. C.]
    .

    Dear Everybody,
    I respect very much that you’ve left this space open, and I thank you for your tact.

    I also respect the responsibility this places on me.

    But it’s so difficult to know what to say to Tom next. Even though I feel I’m right to appeal to him directly, I can’t imagine how he could reply honestly without crying. And after you start crying like that there’s no quick way to stop, and of course when you do stop and get back to where you were you’re not the same person anymore. And that’s dire.

    That’s the most important thing I have to say straight off.

    ~

    Secondly, I was very interested in Bill Carpenter’s suggestion that Tom start a new career as a stand-up comedian at poetry conferences and readings, but I don’t think Bill has any idea just how deep Tom’s bitterness goes. Stand-up comedians aren’t appreciated who bring the whole house down quite literally, and quite literally the whole house right on down to before Ezra Pound was born. That’s not funny any more in a poetry context — that gets boring.

    Bill Carpenter also said ( April 25, 2011 at 10:37 am ):

    Tom likes the drama… He is a performance artist, he has a real gift for it beyond and beside his entertaining content. At some point he will feel he has run through his anti-modernist material and leave it behind, along with his advocacy for Poe and Shelley. Kevin mocks Tom for letting himself get beaten up in public, but as Ishmael sort of says, there’s substance to someone who let’s himself be laughed at. The Woodman Challenge post was inspired, suggesting there is a whole vein of Dostoyevskyan self-abasement waiting for Tom to mine.

    And that’s something — and I do hope Tom hears it. Indeed, not an insignificant number of would-be artists have survived this passage to become good, and some even great.

    I myself quit writing poetry as a school boy at 17 because I so distrusted myself, how I could lie, manipulate words, imitate styles and fabricate images, like a ‘Mad Man’ indeed — and that really did happen to me in 1957. I only felt humble enough, and broken enough too, to start again at 50.

    All that remains now at 71 is to get good.

    ~

    I think for me the most horrible moment of all on Scarriet was when Tom put up this. I think the flippant insensitivity to my objections in the comments shows just how entrenched Tom actually is in his niche. He just doesn’t see or hear what is more care what he says.

    That’s why stonewalling Mark is so easy for him. On the other hand, Mark is in bed to the end of the month, so there’s still hope. Tom has still got the chance to build on the opportunity Mark is so generously offering him, lucky guy.

    How many of us are so lucky to be pursued by such an angel?

    Christopher

    • April 27, 2011 at 4:58 am

      It’s the comment just above that’s been so hard to post — you can scroll up to read it.

      C.

  12. Poem support said,

    April 26, 2011 at 8:51 am

    Schwarzenegger

    By the shores of the Pacific,
    In the town of glitz and hustle,
    Strode the mighty Schwarzenegger,
    Baring chest and flexing muscle;
    Biceps twitched in perfect rhythm
    Through his skill with isometrics,—
    Feats that Letterman, on seeing,
    Sought to use as Stupid Pet Tricks.

    But the bulging Schwarzenegger
    Set his sights on goals much higher,
    As the lure of movie stardom
    Pumped him up with great desire;
    Soon he found himself in epics,
    Slaying enemies like vermin,
    Tearing dialogue to pieces
    With his accent, Anglo-German.

    Clenching jaw, he raged as “Conan,”
    Who, upset by double-dealing,
    Slaughters half the population
    To express his depth of feeling;
    Next “The Terminator” starred him
    As a droid bent on aggression,
    Killing victims for two hours
    Without changing his expression.

    As a soldier in “Commando,”
    On whole armies he was feasting,
    Shrugging off a hail of bullets
    Like a flea-bite or a bee-sting;
    Not Stallone in Panavision
    Matched the fury of his scowling
    When in “Predator” he thrilled us
    In the art of disemboweling.

    In a further quest for glory
    As “The Running Man” he bore up,
    Bringing down the rule of evil
    While assorted foes he tore up;
    See him punch out his oppressors,
    Rip apart a villain’s torso,
    Bludgeon killers into meatloaf
    Like Chuck Norris, only more so.

    Yes, the massive Schwarzenegger,
    Muscles rippling, tendons straining,
    Now, through fame and sky-high grosses,
    As a superstar is reigning;
    Let the critics crucify him
    When his lines he seems to louse up;
    If it’s brains that wins the Oscars,
    It’s the beef that fills the house up.

    Frank Jacobs

  13. April 27, 2011 at 1:27 am

    Dear Tom,
    Please do neaten up this thread.

    Somehow a glitch, or the settings of Scarriet. perhaps, have meant that my posts do not appear in the Recent Comments list — this has happened 9 times now. This time my comment didn’t appear at all, and then when I asked you to fix it all 3 of my failed attempts popped up all at once. Which is embarrassing.

    Unless you specifically want to embarrass me, which is possible, please do neaten up the mess — delete comments #6086 and 6089, plus the two complaints.

    And if you have a moment, you could also go into the “Before There Was Billy Collins” thread and neaten that up too, as I’ve asked you.

    You just have to click here, then add a single “/” before the html code-word “strong” following the word “socialism” — which is where the BOLD begins, so it’s easy to spot.

    I’d much appreciate it.

    Christopher

    https://scarriet.wordpress.com/2011/03/23/before-there-was-billy-collins-ted-kooser-there-was-edgar-guest-ron-silliman/#comment-5228

    here,

  14. April 27, 2011 at 2:48 am

    Getting thick now, neatening up the glitches and then leaving just the irrelevant complaints to undermine the thread.

    Makes me as a troll as well, I guess.

    Check out what I just posted here to see the deconstruction of another Brady comment that may cast light on the matter.

    If you want to remove comments #13 through 16 I’d be delighted, Tom. The thread could then emerge from this shadow and continue.

    C.

  15. April 27, 2011 at 9:25 am

    Tom,
    I’m now posting from another computer with a different ISP, because I can see that all my attempts at posting the Comment in question have been unsuccessful. So here it is again.

    I’d very much appreciate it if you would also go in and clean up the mess, including all the duplicates and the various comments asking for your help.
    Thanks, C.

    .
    Dear Everybody,
    I respect very much that you’ve left this space open, and I thank you for your tact.

    I also respect the responsibility this places on me.

    But it’s so difficult to know what to say to Tom next. Even though I feel I’m right to appeal to him directly, I can’t imagine how he could reply honestly without crying. And after you start crying like that there’s no quick way to stop, and of course when you do stop and get back to where you were you’re not the same person anymore. And that’s dire.

    That’s the most important thing I have to say straight off.

    ~

    Secondly, I was very interested in Bill Carpenter’s suggestion that Tom start a new career as a stand-up comedian at poetry conferences and readings, but I don’t think Bill has any idea just how deep Tom’s bitterness goes. Stand-up comedians aren’t appreciated who bring the whole house down quite literally, and quite literally the whole house right on down to before Ezra Pound was born. That’s not funny any more in a poetry context — that gets boring.

    Bill Carpenter also said ( April 25, 2011 at 10:37 am ):

    Tom likes the drama… He is a performance artist, he has a real gift for it beyond and beside his entertaining content. At some point he will feel he has run through his anti-modernist material and leave it behind, along with his advocacy for Poe and Shelley. Kevin mocks Tom for letting himself get beaten up in public, but as Ishmael sort of says, there’s substance to someone who let’s himself be laughed at. The Woodman Challenge post was inspired, suggesting there is a whole vein of Dostoyevskyan self-abasement waiting for Tom to mine.

    And that’s something — and I do hope Tom hears it. Indeed, not an insignificant number of would-be artists have survived this passage to become good, and some even great.

    I myself quit writing poetry as a school boy at 17 because I so distrusted myself, how I could lie, manipulate words, imitate styles and fabricate images, like a ‘Mad Man’ indeed — and that really did happen to me in 1957. I only felt humble enough, and broken enough too, to start again at 50.

    All that remains now at 71 is to get good.

    ~

    I think for me the most horrible moment of all on Scarriet was when Tom put up this. I think the flippant insensitivity to my objections in the comments shows just how entrenched Tom actually is in his niche. He just doesn’t see or hear what is more care what he says.

    That’s why stonewalling Mark is so easy for him. On the other hand, Mark is in bed to the end of the month, so there’s still hope. Tom has still got the chance to build on the opportunity Mark is so generously offering him, lucky guy.

    How many of us are so lucky to be pursued by such an angel?

    Christopher

  16. Christopher Woodman said,

    April 27, 2011 at 9:29 am

    My comment #15 (April 27, 2011 at 9:25 am) still does not apear in the Recent Comments list.

    Christopher


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: