not a thesis kinda writer
By shag carpet bomb • Jun 4th, 2010 • Category: WGAF Filesi’m just not a writer who works from a thesis. i don’t know what i want to say when i start out. i work in pastiche or some shit. when i’m done, i don’t have any driving idea that’s guiding me. between “beginning” and “ending” there’s a whole bunch of shit in between and it often has zero connection with anything. it’s one pass and another and another. picture it like a shark, taking a stab at rotting flesh hanging off a hook. duhdup duhdup duhdup. snag some flesh here, snag some there. always always always: avoid the hook.
i can’t even be arsed to put ridiculous tildas and asterisks in some whack combination, like this: **~**
fuckme.
Amber would place them between each “section” in a post. She started doing that because she got attacked once for lack of such a signal to her readers. So, in a fit of mild picque, she started tilda’ing up her posts like Daisy Chain does. I thought it was funny and every time I see the tilda and asterisks combo meal on her blog, I think: Amber hearts the Tilda Preservation Society. ha ha.
Me? i just can’t even be arsed. I’m a lazy ass.
maybe someone reads what i write and gets something out of it. if so, it’s always a wonder to me since, other than times when I’m explicating someone else’s work, I have zero to say, myself. about the only time i have anything to say at all is when i’m so lit up about something, i’m crying. no tears; zero to say. and so it was with this obama piece. i really just didn’t care what the left thinks about obama and what we’re going to do about it, if anything. and if I can’t work up a good cry, then ain’t ever going to work up a word to say that matters to me.
so, take it from me: if you ever read something from me and it was any good, it was because I was bawling my eyes out. like a pussy, as sonshine’s friends would say.
same with my recent commentary i have to admit: i have zero to say. sort of as Zizek says: if it smells like shit and looks shit, it IS shit. LOL. I mean, if what I’m saying doesn’t have any coherence, it’s because I don’t have any coherent thoughts on the matter. I have zero to teach anyone, zero wisdom to impart, zero that I think is worth sharing with anyone besides, well, just sitting around shooting the shit here ‘n’ there.
i’m a reactive writer, not a productive or generative one. i react. i lash out. i eviscerate. i scath. i don’t produce. i don’t generate. i don’t create. i don’t want wholeness or coherence or oneness or resolution. i want it all ripped to shreds, torn down to nothingness. someone else can be whole, be one, be unified. it’s just not me: unless I’m crying.
Maybe that’s what Gary Patrick Norris always meant by poetry. But that would be dignifying prattle with a name it rilly n. trooly doesn’t deserve. or maybe poets have been dignifying the prattle with the name ‘poetry’ for centuries and they’ve just been pulling a fast one on everyone for so long no one knows the difference or cares anymore. i certainly find poetry totally .. meh. except when gary writes it natch. i read other people’s stuff and go, “that’s nice,” most of the time. i mean, if it sounds nice or there’s a clever turn of phrase, that’s cool. but otherwise? meh.
i’m reminded of the stuff neil peart used to say when people wanted to know the deeper meaning behind his lyrics. he’d basically say: i haven’t a clue. if that’s what you think it means, great.
lame, eh?
shag carpet bomb is
Email this author | All posts by shag carpet bomb
“tilda and asterisks combo meal” - love it!!
What brought this on?
@amber - glad you liked it.
@chuckie - need to rewrite my article so it has a thesis or develops one. problem is: don’t have one. when i conclude with “marx failed. we should too.” i really have zero idea as to what i am trying to say. i think when i started writing all this months ago i started out with this: “i gotta tell ya. i got nothing.”
i’d like to publish that. :)
Even the small citations from the invite and the potential contributors gave me the impression they were thinking of classic strategy responses. Summation > suggestion. Since you don’t belong to the established political career, committed to an organization, reputed commentator club, you face the biggest challenge in responding. Coming at the problem on a tangent. Outside the question is not at all out the question, I think.