ellen kennedy
yesterday i was talking to myself and i told myself that i was going to write a book and give it to you so i put paper in my bag and put a pen in my bag and rode my bike to the river bank and then sat on the ground and thought 'i will never write a book' and watched ducks swim away from me by ellen kennedy
also by ellen kennedy with tao lin is the very retarded giant moth and hikikomori
i want to sleepbear parade is designed and created by gene morgan
by ellen kennedy
don't touch me
by ellen kennedy
i have no ambitions
by ellen kennedy
my life is a typo
by ellen kennedy
i might work in a laundromat!
by ellen kennedy
today i bought a small pink flower
by ellen kennedy
there is blood on my flowers
by ellen kennedy
how the government ruins lives (a love poem)
by ellen kennedy
you didn't know why i was laughing
by ellen kennedy
choke me
by ellen kennedy
also by ellen kennedy with tao lin is the very retarded giant moth and hikikomori
8:22 PM
66 Comments:
Looks really good. Tomorrow I'll try to give it a read.
Today, I read Ellen's book. I would like to interview Ellen. I would like to ask her questions about punctuation and animals and maybe blueberries. Will Ellen talk to me about those things, and then allow me to post the interview on The Reader of Absurdist Books?
I would comment about this "book", but then I would get attacked for not supporting the community which doesn't exist.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
eric, what are you doing?
if you want to say something please say it
for an idea of how to use clear, simple language, please read ellen's book
matthew, email ellen and ask her
Gene, I put quotation marks around things I do not understand. Like "love."
Tao, I am being sad. Sometimes when I am sad, I become obnoxious; this is perhaps the result of growing up in a household where it was not ok to be sad, which, of course, is sad.
I am sad because the book uses childhood language, often without using the childhood imagination or sensitivity (which may not be much different from imagination).
I like it when the baby-wonder implants are firing, like
i grabbed the brown duck. it didn't try to swim or fly away. i tied a string around its neck. as i walked, it flew above me like a balloon.
But too often it is just
today i walked across the bridge. a line of small children followed me as i walked. they threw quarters and nickels at me. the quarters stuck into my skin and left dents. the nickels bounced off. i bled a little. i licked the blood.
and if I'm to be slowed down by simple sentences, slowed down to a pace where I can see every blade of grass instead of a green blur, I want to see little ants crawling up the grass and some blades curled one way and some shorter than others, and maybe a special lady bug with its nose in the behind of another lady bug, and all sorts of wonderful surprising little things.
Too often, I just see grass.
The language is clear, but what does it say?
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Looking back in a more reasonable frame of mind, what I said was too harsh, and in places unfair and for that I apologize. I considered deleting the posts, but they expressed my honest opinion at the time. I took the time to read through the site, going through each poem in turn, and what came out in my posts was my immediate reaction. Getting a strong reaction isn’t a bad thing, I think – the strong negative reaction you provoked in me was likely a strong positive reaction in someone else. If people are at least giving a shit enough to comment, you know you've done your job.
As I said in the first one: "You don’t have to accept my standard if you don’t want."
If I made you late to work, I'm sorry.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
As said before, I felt my previous posts were rash, and they have now been deleted.
I will continue to read the site as you say. I think that not everything is to everyone's taste and, as you say, the site is still young. To be honest, things which provoke a negative reaction in me are often of more interest to me than things which I approve of without any real emotional investment. So, consider it a success.
i'm reposting the comments that were deleted, so people can look at them; i also want to look at them here and respond to them:
JUSTIN:
"Everything posted on Bear Parade to date has been, to my mind, unadulterated rubbish.
There’s a vast difference between ‘simple’ and ‘simplistic’, and these ‘poems’ definitely fall into the latter category. The approximate mental level displayed in them is that of an angsty thirteen year old.
The monotonous, unimaginative structures, the lack of striking images or metaphors, the absence of punctuation…this is all very, very high school. I can just see the little spiral-bound notebooks these things were scribbled in.
Then there’s the predictable retreat into cuteness – hamsters, ducks, bears, wow, so twee! Hey, there’s a kind of vague sadness to the poems as well!! This is cutting-edge stuff!
The Bear Parade poems are only interesting to people who have no real problems. They capture well the kind of spoiled, anomic introversion of the children of upper-middle class Americans.
I bet this critique will produce lots of happiness. This critique plays right into the hands of the sensibility displayed in Bear Parade poetry. Because nothing is ‘good’, ‘bad’, or ‘important’, right? How can we say that when we don’t know what the meaning of life is? How can I possibly be justified in saying the poems aren’t ‘good’ ? Who am I to say this?
Here’s my standard: if I could easily mimic the piece of writing to the extent that my mimicry is not sufficiently distinguishable from the original, then the piece of writing is not ‘good’ or ‘important’. I could have churned out the entire Bear Parade catalogue to date in about five minutes. There are no interesting metaphors, no interesting uses of language, no memorable structures, nothing that sticks in the mind. They are forgettable jottings.
You don’t have to accept my standard if you don’t want. But it IS my standard. So: you failed to impress me. Better luck next time. You said you were only interested in writers who ‘didn’t stand the test of time’ – good for you, you shouldn’t have much trouble joining them! You guys can all hang out in the ‘forgotten by history’ writers’ room in the afterlife. Maybe you’ll all have fun putting your hamsters through their plastic playsets. Watching that hamster spin the wheel forever – sounds fun, doesn’t it? In fact, a hamster spinning on a wheel – repetitive, masturbatory and pointless – it’s a great metaphor for Bear Parade in general! I’M A GENIUS!!
Is that ‘clear’ and ‘simple’ enough for you?
P..S. I know you’re happy now. This critique is probably your wet dream, because it uses words like ‘good’, ‘bad’, and ‘important’ and makes distinctions between different kinds of writing. Hey, I just used ‘memorable’ and ‘interesting’ in an approbatory context! That’s a no-no in the Bear Parade fantasy world, isn’t it? I guess I’m voted off the island now. Ouch!"
JUSTIN:
"gelsinger, I can tell you think the ‘book’ is rubbish as well, but you’re afraid to point out the emperor’s new clothes. Don’t be. Doing so will single you out, but belonging to a circle jerk session of mediocrity is not something you really want anyway. You’re using Pound as your icon: remember ‘In a Station of the Metro’ ?
‘The apparition of these faces in the crowd
Petals on a wet, black bough.’
That’s the entire poem. That’s clarity. Note the precision of the word ‘apparition’, all that it connotes. If a Bear Parade writer tried to write that, it would be
‘i went to a station of the metro
there were people there
i saw some faces
faces in the crowd
they reminded me of petals on a bough
a wet, black bough’"
GENE:
"i will respond with an essay to crush all fears when i get home for lunch.
i see gelsingers point, so i will not argue with that so much. he has a valid arguement and a dislike of one of what will be many many books. this is fine. he has even answered his own question, if you read the comment close enough.
justin, you have attacked my entire website. i am about to destroy you, so please, get ready."
"Because nothing is ‘good’, ‘bad’, or ‘important’, right? How can we say that when we don’t know what the meaning of life is? How can I possibly be justified in saying the poems aren’t ‘good’ ? Who am I to say this?"
yes
"You don’t have to accept my standard if you don’t want. But it IS my standard. So: you failed to impress me. Better luck next time. You said you were only interested in writers who ‘didn’t stand the test of time’ – good for you, you shouldn’t have much trouble joining them! You guys can all hang out in the ‘forgotten by history’ writers’ room in the afterlife. Maybe you’ll all have fun putting your hamsters through their plastic playsets. Watching that hamster spin the wheel forever – sounds fun, doesn’t it? In fact, a hamster spinning on a wheel – repetitive, masturbatory and pointless – it’s a great metaphor for Bear Parade in general! I’M A GENIUS!!"
yes, you have just told me that i do not want to 'stand the test of time' and that i have succeeded
uh, yes
i will join jean rhys, fernando pessoa, etc., though maybe asian americans might use me and say i an talking about cultural heritage rather than the nature of being and existence, just like many literary critics said 'good morning, midnight,' by jean rhys was prescient of fascism, same with kafka, and that fernando pessoa was innovative for his personas
maybe i will last
it doesn't matter though
can we please live in concrete reality?
if you want to reduce pain and suffering in the world, in the long view, then, probably--probably, this is how to do it--spend less money, focus less on abstractions, do things like not eat animals, not spend money on publically owned companies, never see anything but the living thing (abstractions exist and block out the living things) (your entire argument seems to be based on abstractions, which means it's just a matter of semantics and subjectivity [what does 'interesting' mean, what does 'monotonous' mean] which means it has no basis in concrete reality, which means your philosophy, really, is that life is meaningless, though the difference is you do not realize that, and so are still able to feel anger towards things--art, harmless people, people who have no ambition, people who realize meaninglessness--that are harmless in concrete reality
i have used only facts here, i think
there is no sarcasm
usually when i use facts the other person thinks i'm being 'arrogant' or 'sarcastic'
let me go read it again, to make sure it is all facts
okay
it is all facts
thank you for reading these facts
"‘The apparition of these faces in the crowd
Petals on a wet, black bough.’"
yes, you like that
i am not really affected by that
i realize i am not affected by that because i was born, things happened to me, and now here i am, with a brain that is not affected by that
my grandparents were born, they had things happen to them, my parents were born, then i was born
here i am
and i am not affected by that
i understand this
i understand that other people exist in the world that are affected by that excerpt
they were born, they had things happen to them, and now here they are, with brains that are affected by that
people are different
i realize people are different
there are no hierarchies in art
but there are so many hierarchies in art, created by writers, mostly
it is strange, really
why do so many intelligent people create hierarchies where none exist?
it really feels strange to me
if you give a working-class person a book that they are not affected by most would be able to understand that though they are not affected by it others might, and are
if you give an intellectual person who has gone to college and maybe is getting an MFA a book and they are not affected by it they most likely will attack it with abstractions, thereby creating hierarchy, which is a kind of fascism; which is extra strange because these are the people who are liberals, the most liberal, they would say, of people in the country
it's strange
i urge people to live in concrete reality
instructions to exist in concrete reality:
1. realize meaninglessness
2. make assumptions (pain and suffering is to be destroyed whenever possible; pain and suffering is to be inflicted on humans until all humans are dead; whatever you want) to create philosophy
3. use your physical body to convey the philosophy
4. realize that you have made assumptions and therefore your philosophy is not 'right,' 'wrong,' 'good,' or 'bad'
everything i type, think, or say, by the way, is typed, thought, or said with awareness that assumptions have been made
which means
identityless
which means
if you have anger then direct it at the universe, and existence, not me, people like me, or people associated with 'me'
thank you
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
no
I will try:
I wonder if it might be useful to try and explain 'meaning.' Perhaps I'm childish, or too un-childish, but I cannot accept life as meaningless--this phrase is, to me, the ultimate abstraction. If I didn't believe in some kind of meaning--again, what does that mean? I don't know--I doubt I would write, or read. I would just look and see and accept (or not, maybe just notice) that certain things affect me and affect my vision, either by distorting it or distilling it. I believe the things that have meaning to me are good, even when I don't *like* those things. Maybe this is what you mean, Justin, by your later comments--but this question of *liking* is far less interesting to me than the question of whether or not meaning exists, because the former verges on all manners of discussion about aesthetic, style, and other things I'm bored with, and tired of hearing about. Tao, what you say about making a philosophy based on assumptions seems to me to be an effective way *out* of meaninglessness, and into whatever space that philosophy upholds as 'real.' I have no desire, really, to reduce the pain and suffering of the world, unless reducing it means shaking it down for its wallet or other valuables. Which is to say, I can't think about 'the world' as such without relying on abstraction, on what I think I know about the world based on what I see on the news (which I don't watch) or read in the papers (most of which I don't read). I know, abstractly, of the world's pain and suffering, and I know, abstractly, that I am implicated, inasmuch as I am part of the world, and because that will never change, I will locate what is meaningful in small places (in a teacup, on a blog, etc.) What is that saying, that it is easier to love 'people' than it is to love a 'person'--maybe that applies here. Maybe not, since I probably have lost my way. Tao, what you say about intellectuals and hierarchies is of course very true--so much clever harrumphing and theorizing has left a big stack of cadavers that we can now only tag and stack according to height, weight, cause of death, etc. Justin, to me your criticism betrays a certain hostility, because you feel Bear Parade rings false, it isn't 'real,' it won't last. Or, to put it another way, it won't 'stack' the way you think it ought to, with Pound's petals, etc. I don't criticize, because I think your energy has created a good discussion. And you clearly stated that your standard was just that--yours*--so I don't really see a problem here, except that we must all know, I think, that our reactions to things are informed by whatever our relationship is to meaning, and what meaning means. Also, I am in a bind, because I like to say, 'this is just my point of view, and it's absolutely not the final word, and your point of view is fine too, because you are a person and I respect you'--but in reality (my reality), how do I allow for your philosophy if I perceive mine to be true? Aren't we all guilty, just a bit, of hegemony? I don't want to pursue this further because I don't want to get political and I just had a thought that made me laugh and also I'm tired of writing in this 'careful' way.
For my part I'd like to just say that the moments in Ellen's book that did mean something to me, meant a lot.
*I wonder, by the way, why anyone feels the need to say that? 'This is just *my* point of view, but...'? Such a statement does several things, I guess--it's a way for a speaker to take ownership of his or her thoughts, albeit a false ownership, since such thoughts are often representative of a group; at the same time it's a kind of disclaimer, a way to dodge the bullet or assuage one's trepidation for making the 'offending' comment.
kristen, 'meaningless' is abstract
i don't know what the word 'meaning' means
i admit i don't know what i'm talking about
i understand nothing and often feel 'fucked'
this comments section proves that humans are 'fucked' probably
to me it does
'fucked'
yes
maybe it should be called 'fucked' parade
these discussions always happen here
the same things always get said
and i always in the end conclude in feeling 'fucked'
'fucked'
i just thought about the word 'meaningless'
the word is so 'fucked'
i just laughed a little
what is that word?
it defines itself, or something, and it itself is meaningless, yet it exists, so it must be something, but it only exists if the word 'meaning' means something
it is very fucked
You returned statements I deleted to the site and responded to them...so, I am now impelled to respond as well.
“(your entire argument seems to be based on abstractions, which means it's just a matter of semantics and subjectivity [what does 'interesting' mean, what does 'monotonous' mean] which means it has no basis in concrete reality, which means your philosophy, really, is that life is meaningless, though the difference is you do not realize that)
For this to work you’re going to have to define ‘meaning’. You also make an incredible logical leap by arriving at ‘life is meaningless.’ from my subjectivity.
Life is not meaningless.
Life is given meaning by subjectivity.
Several people decide that ‘God’ has instructed them to do something.
Several other people decide the same thing.
One group uses this information to run a soup kitchen.
The other group uses it to kill people they don’t like.
Both use abstractions, both arrived at ‘meaning’ for life. That the meanings are contradictory does not mean they are not meanings. They affect 'concrete' reality.
Human beings do not function with a clear distinction between ‘abstract’ and ‘concrete’. This is an arbitrary distinction which you have constructed, and which does not have any empirical basis.
One crucial difference between human beings and other animals is that human beings are able to use language and conceptualization. This, as you would have it, is the 'abstract' realm.
Your statement that ‘life is meaningless’ is itself a meaning given to life. It is itself an abstraction. The moment you enter language you deal with meaning and abstractions, because language itself is an abstraction.
“I sat on the chair.”
‘clear’, ‘simple’ sentence, right? No. What chair? Who’s “I”? Reading that sentence, we both visualized different chairs and different “I’s”.
I stated in my original post that I was using my individual standard. With this, as you say, I constructed a hierarchy. But, so did you. By placing 'concrete' above 'abstract', by defining those terms as oppositions, you placed 'concrete' above 'abstract.'
My standard does not restrict your right to write. I cannot legitimately say ‘You can’t do this!” or “No one can possibly find enjoyment in this!”
However, it allows me to criticize you.
Let’s take an example from a poem of yours:
i'm tired
i'm going to eat a lettuce
it's stupid to make sense
i don't want to make sense anymore
just let me type something stupid and let it be good
i'm tired
i'm stupid
i don't care
sentences are too long
go away
i'm depressed
I could have written this. I can think of many other people who could have written this. Furthermore, I have heard the statements in it before. I can assume this is parody, but even if I do this, it does not strike me as intrinsically interesting. You will reply that this is my subjective personal opinion. But, I spent time reading this. I read your e-book. I then felt frustration, because it bored me. Using my standard, I then expressed this opinion and gave evidence as to why this occurred.
Let’s take another example from an Ellen Kennedy poem:
“i prefer watching movies alone. i prefer reading alone. i prefer eating alone. i prefer walking alone. i prefer listening to music alone. i prefer singing alone. i prefer swimming alone. i prefer to eat small children alone.”
I find this structure to be dull and repetitive. The speaker is isolated and prefers to be alone. So what? ‘i prefer to eat small children alone.’ I find this to be trite, in that it reminds me of something I’d see on a mass-produced goth T-shirt at Hot
Topic. The combination of sentiments I have heard before, combined with a structure which jags on my mind (when read aloud, or when recited mentally) produces disappointment in me.
Claiming that ‘life is meaningless’ is a reductio ad absurdum argument. This is a statement that leads to the conclusion that there’s no reason for anything because we have no reasons for anything.(note the redundancy) So either everything is okay, or everything is not okay.
”i don't know what the word 'meaning' means
i admit i don't know what i'm talking about
i understand nothing and often feel 'fucked'”
You just proved my point.
I stated in my original post:
"You don’t have to accept my standard if you don’t want. But it IS my standard. So: you failed to impress me. Better luck next time.”
“everything i type, think, or say, by the way, is typed, thought, or said with awareness that assumptions have been made
which means
identityless”
I disagree, because the nature of your assumptions individuates you. There's no way out of style here, no way out of 'identity'.
What your philosophy amounts to is that since everything is ‘meaningless’, so is criticism. If this is the case, if there’s no reliable consensus, then there’s no reason to work at anything. First thought, best thought. If Idon’t like something you do, well, who are you to criticize it, since life is meaningless?
If this is the ‘concrete’ universe you wish to inhabit, then I leave you to it. I find this argument boring. You will of course counter that ‘boring’ is a subjective abstraction. But as shown, your argument, to me, is quite ‘semantic’ and ‘abstract’ (to use your terms).
You mentioned that you liked Fernando Pessoa. Keep in mind, then, that Pessoa was a master of throwing his voice; his heteronyms allowed him to assume various opinion-stances and prose styles at will, many of which were at odds with each other. Investigate that: it’ll do your writing good.
As for anything else: what I cannot do is deny anyone the right to work or find enjoyment. I apologized to Gene because I was too harsh, and my statements in regard to that stand. As I said, the negative reaction produced in me was likely a positive reaction produced in someone else. I am not stating that I have a divine writ to determine what is 'good' and what is 'bad' - far from it.
"Better luck next time. You said you were only interested in writers who ‘didn’t stand the test of time’ – good for you, you shouldn’t have much trouble joining them!"
That was awesome. That was like caddy plus 2. A ghetto chick and a flaming gay man would bow before you on that.
That is good.
Ellen is a petite Mozart. People write for twenty years to accomplish what Ellen can blink out (big eyes) during a conversation. Her work makes me feel like Salieri. I am crying and slitting my throat with her hair now. Thank you.
the frustration is just someone uncomfortable and in a weird place they do not understand.
Unfortunately, I’m capable of recognizing clichéd writing.
bear parade embraces the same things people have been writing about for some time, just a little more current maybe. a little more subversive, and with a different style.
Let’s quote Ellen Kennedy again:
i thought 'life is shit'
then i realized that most bestsellers are shit
she was right
This poem compares the speaker’s life with a bestseller and concludes that both are shit. This is neither ‘current’ nor ‘subversive’. There is nothing ‘different’ about the thoughts expressed, nor about the style – it is a cliché. I should point out that self-conscious attempts to be ‘current’ and ‘subversive’ are what constitute most poetic banality. Propagating clichés is not subversive: it’s what constitutes most mainstream literature.
i understand this. if i was justin, i would react the same way at first. 'this is different. no one supports this kind of thing. how is it possible that people put time and effort behind this?'
Unfortunately it is not ‘different’ and it is supported by all too many people. I find group-think to be boring and lazy. I am hardly some kind of ‘intellectual establishment,’ as previous posts have implied. I am arguing these things on you guys’ turf; the immediate sympathy lies with you from your return-readers and not with me. I don’t take my opinions second-hand from the academic establishment as you seem to imply: they are my opinions, arrived at through experience and by engaging with the material. I read the poems and engaged with them. I didn’t like them, said so, and supported my arguments. I have given it more than enough time and consideration. The response to my criticism essentially consisted of:
‘i don’t know
there is no meaning
life is stupid
i don’t know what i’m talking about
this stuff always happens
what’s the point of arguing
we never get anywhere
why can’t we all just get along”
The ‘everything is meaningless, there is no standard for judgment’ is, to my mind, the very consensus-thought of academic America: “There is no bad art.” Second-hand post-structuralism has been the vogue for at least twenty years. It’s not ‘new’, ‘subversive’, or ‘different.’
i respect your opinion, justin, but because it is just that. it is your opinion; it is your reaction. and i agree with you, i have gotten lots of violent reactions from the site, good and bad, so i think it's doing something right.
This statement I can agree with it. If you say about something I dislike,
“I like this.”
Then I cannot argue with that statement. I cannot say "Your emotional reaction is invalid." There is no arguing with taste. But, I have tried to give evidence for my statements, to justify my opinions. If I had made a nebulous positive generalization like:
Ellen is a petite Mozart. People write for twenty years to accomplish what Ellen can blink out (big eyes) during a conversation.
, you would not have had any argument with this generalization. You would not say ‘Please show some evidence for this.’ The above statement, to my mind, is far more 'abstract' than anything I said. It is like a blurb that would be found on an Oprah book. It says nothing and could be applied to anyone. So much for ‘different’ and ‘subversive.’
As said before, I will continue to read the site; I’m not somehow shutting my eyes and refusing to listen to what you have to say.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
yesterday i wrote a monotonous stream-of-consciousness poem and walked outside and sat down and wrote another monotonous stream-of-consciousness poem and wondered why my poetry wasn’t better and watched the clouds drifting overhead and felt alone
and i was happy to be alone.
This is my poem ‘ellen kennedy’. I request that, if as you say, everything I have just said is specious, that my argument about anyone being able to write something is a cliché argument, then I request that you post my poem ‘ellen kennedy’ on Bear Parade and attribute it to Justin. If you do not feel a single poem is enough I will write more such poems until I have accreted a book, and I will then request that said book be published on Bear Parade. The title of this book will be 'i am a person who is imitating ellen kennedy and my poems are imitative poems and my lunch box is open' and it will be written by Justin.
I want to read Justin's book.
I will link to bear parade from my blog if you publish Justin's book.
Every day my blog gets "hits."
(Justin, you might find it fun (as I do) to think of this writing as inseparable from its publishing. To take Charles Olson way out of context: "publishing is writing." Here on the blogs, bear parade, etc., that's embodied.)
Well, I can see that demand for new material from my forthcoming book of poetry, "i am a person who is imitating ellen kennedy and my poems are imitative poems and my lunch box is open', is growing. As of this writing, my book of poetry is not yet complete and so has not been submitted to Gene, the editor of Bear Parade. But, here is the newest poem. It's called 'i'm tired of opinions'
i'm tired of people's opinions. i don't like to hear their opinions. their opinions make me sad like a balloon. a balloon on codeine.
i filled a balloon with codeine and let it fly. it broke somewhere over a preschool.
i walked in thorn bushes and the thorn bushes pricked my hips
a dog licked the blood from them and i laughed
and smashed the dog with a hammer
and cried
and played in its bones.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
if it wasn't such a blatant rip-off of ellen kennedy.
Are you saying blatant rip-offs are 'bad'? I thought 'bad' was an abstraction? Or is it a cliche? If the argument about anyone being able to create something is cliched, then surely calling something a 'rip-off' is equally cliche.
I can see that the Bear Parade administration is clinging to obsolete and cliched abstractions as a means of silencing new and subversive writing such as my book of poetry, 'i am a person who is imitating ellen kennedy and my poems are imitative poems and my lunch box is open.'
The debate is indeed over, but my searing poetry lives on, unsilenced by fascism!
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Your opinion: clichés are all right.
My opinion: clichés make for uninteresting writing.
If anyone can do something, it is not good writing. This is an opinion. It is a cliché to the extent that I did not magically manifest this opinion that no one has thought of before; it is a cliché in the sense that most opinions are clichés. On the same theme, I could say “Your argument that writing can contain clichés is also a cliché’ (i.e. pop art) That, however, is the broad definition of ‘I didn’t create the English language and I was not the first person to hold these views.’
The clichés I am talking about are very specific poetic ones, such as the ellen and tao poems, that repeat verbatim sentiments that have been written before, done so in repetitive structures. I have already demonstrated why I feel these poems contain writing which is not worthy of notice. Your argument that my points are not valid because my tendency to dislike specific poetic clichés which could be done by anyone is a cliché position does not hold because it does not say anything about those poetic clichés themselves; it just establishes that I am not the first person to hold my opinion. So what? I’m not claiming to be the first person to hold my opinion. Claiming my standard as my standard does not mean that it is a standard that is not shared by others. I am merely offering evidence in service of that standard. You can choose to disagree with my standard if you wish. If this is the case, I would like to see an explanation for why the writing I mentioned is effective, interesting, or noteworthy, something which would justify the time spent on it.
In other words, we are talking about two different things. You are talking about my standard, and I am talking about specific poems. You are being abstract, I am being specific. If my opinion is invalidated because I am not the first person to hold my opinion, then this argument could be applied to any opinion, therefore this argument is irrelevant.
I have yet to see anyone try to defend the poems I mentioned. I have yet to see anyone give a straightforward argument as to why they could be considered interesting. I have yet to see anyone try to distinguish Ellen Kennedy’s poems from the poems in my ‘ellen kennedy’ book.
To my mind, all you have ‘won’ is the distinction of proving yourself a hypocrite by failing to accept my challenge to publish my book of poetry. I accepted your challenge to write Ellen Kennedy poems, but you completely whiffed once I presented you with poems that were indistinguishable in structure and content from actual Ellen Kennedy poems. Yet, you hypocritically refused my challenge on the grounds that it was a ‘rip-off.’, ignoring the fact that if poetic clichés are desirable, then my poetry cannot be a ‘rip-off’ since it is just the further propagation of Ellen Kennedy’s ‘effective’ clichés.
I feel strangely undestroyed.
More likely you’re afraid to actually put my poems up there and have most of your readership see the emperor’s new…
Nah. I won’t say it. It’s a cliché. :)
This will be my last post to this board. Have fun, guys.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
I like the poems on Bear Parade. Ellen Kennedy's e-book is good, I think (and let me just say, although we are roommates, I do *not* share Tao's reticence about calling something "good" or "bad"), even though the style is deliberately reminiscent of Tao's; actually, Tao, watch your back. Ellen's e-book may steal up behind yours and eat it.
That said, I also like:
"and smashed the dog with a hammer
and cried
and played in its bones."
I like stories where dogs get hurt, or stories where dogs hurt people (or other dogs).
I would read that whole e-book. I bet it would come off pretty obnoxious. But it certainly be interesting
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
this feels better. there was no point to any of what i said or was fighting against.
bear parade is a small website.
we publish things we like, on a personal level.
there is no point in attacking us, because we are not in charge of anything that big.
we are not the emperor.
we are just gene morgan, tao lin, and ellen kennedy, with a side of earl craig. so far.
maybe more, soon.
if you like bear parade, read it.
if you do not like bear parade, please do not read bear parade.
we are not dependant on like/dislike.
we are not selling you anything.
we are not attempting to rule anything.
i make pretty websites, and like them.
and that's nice to me.
so whatever.
everyone go back and delete your comments.
I'm going with "Fucked Parade."
I like the ring of it.
or:
Parade of Fuck?
Fuck the Parade?
I got fucked AT the parade?
I am fucked, the parade!
The Bear Fucked me at the Parade?
Fuck the Bear!
I also like this, "...why do so many intelligent people create hierarchies where none exist?" a lot.
I saw Fucked Parade. I was attracted by the extra big box.
It was cliched
It was repetitive
I couldn't stop watching it.
"i'm tired of people's opinions. i don't like to hear their opinions. their opinions make me sad like a balloon. a balloon on codeine.
i filled a balloon with codeine and let it fly. it broke somewhere over a preschool.
i walked in thorn bushes and the thorn bushes pricked my hips
a dog licked the blood from them and i laughed
and smashed the dog with a hammer
and cried
and played in its bones."
i like that poem
justin:
i went to your site
it says you are going to 'rock' the literary world
for you probably it is a contest, a competition
for bear parade people mostly it is not a competition, i guess
so when you read it it is taking away your meaning in life, which is competition, maybe
therefore you get angry
it's like when you're playing monopoly against someone and the other person stops caring
but you still want to beat them
but they don't care
i didn't read your other comments
i already concluded that i don't know anything, i don't know if i don't know anything, i don't know if i don't know if i don't know anything (etc.), that the word 'meaningless' is absurd and 'fucked' and that life is stupid, sad, and that there is no free will
you can be better than me if you want
you can 'rock' my world in terms of literature, i will let you
there
it is done
tonight i will hit my face with a plastic water bottle for three hours while listening to music then maybe play drums on my bed with my hands for two hours
the only way to stop you from attacking harmless things is to kill you, i think, justin
i just thought that
i have an idea
i'm starting a fund for justin
to come kill ellen kennedy, gene morgan, and tao lin, and maybe injure michael earl craig
it'll be around $2000 for the plane tickets
he can use a lead bar, you can find those on the street
this is called 'the fund for justin to destroy bear parade so that he can stop worrying and go on in his life, possibly to "rock" the literary world, like it says on his site'
What's with all the comment deleting?
i deleted all of my comments. except for one.
i wrote a lot. you should have seen it.
i kept beating justin. like every time.
I'm a little disappointed the comments were deleted to begin with. Many of us who comment here enjoy Tao's writing. It was interetsing to get a new perspective—even though the perspective was hastily put together.
Tao has, many times, made his disdain for cliche pretty clear. And yet, we have an accusation of cliche.
Tao?
And by the comments, I meant Justin's comments. Not yours, gene. It's magnanimous of you to remove your comments, considering how badly you beat Justin. Over and over.
i reposted justin's deleted comments
then responded
but yes, i discourage deleting comments
from now on anyone who deletes
i will repost your comment
also, from now on i might say, 'this is an example of an out of control intellectual freaking out'
when i say that i will be referring to the post by justin that i reposted
this will continue for the rest of my life
referring to justin's post as an example of an 'out of control intellectual freaking out'
it took me three days to read all these comments.
Actually, that was my blog, not really Justin's. Guy's just my guestblogger. So the whole 'rocking the literary world' thing was written by me. Just to clear things up. Well, you guys have fun. Was drawing some traffic from this URL hence I came over to have a look. Thanks for the publicity.
I have been listening to Price all day and I'm ready for this.
Tao is explaining America: He is just being honest.
In America things don't mean shit.
On the news a human states facts to another human in a debate, and what happens, nothing.
In a college classroom, a professor has open conversation, the students disagree, what happens, nothing.
A factory worker bitches to another factory worker about conditions, what happens, nothing.
A woman talks for years how her man beats her, what happens, nothing.
Christians write books and talk about jesus coming back, what happens, nothing.
Bush says there are going to more terrorist attacks, what happens, nothing.
Most people walk around spouting pipe dreams endlessly, I'm gonna do this, I'm gonna do that, what happens, nothing.
Tao writes about the little things we think and feel and go through. Tao does not write about wars or drug addicts, or terrorist plots.
It is about being alone. What people do alone. Most of the scenes in Bed the character is alone, or the scene is just preparing you for the chracter to be alone.
And a literature like that needs to exist.
We need Zolas and Hellers to write about great social events.
We need Bukowskis and Hemingways to write about social interaction.
And we need writers like Jean Rhys and Marcel Proust or Knut Hamsun to show the human in isolation.
I don't think what Tao is saying about meaningless is a big deal. he is just being honest about who he is and who we are as people.
I know many people who view life as meaningless, nihilists in a way. Who don't say a thing about meangingless, but live a meaningless life. Call them automatons, people without ambition, or losers. But the fact is, 90 percent of people are like that. 90 percent of people aren't harming anyone, aren't doing anything but living their lives and trying to get what they can, from what they have.
There is a reason so many people like Tao's writing. They know they don't believe in anything, just like Tao. They won't say it outloud, but they don't.
Does anyone have a nice apartment where we can all have a fun party?
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
I think Bear Parade should publish Justin's imitations of Ellen's book. In fact, wouldn't it be hilarious is there were three million imitations of Ellen's book?
Keep on rocking in the literary world.
Johannes
"Well, I can see that demand for new material from my forthcoming book of poetry, "i am a person who is imitating ellen kennedy and my poems are imitative poems and my lunch box is open', is growing."
"The debate is indeed over, but my searing poetry lives on, unsilenced by fascism!"
These comments, posted by justin, were rather entertaining. I pictured Ignacious J. Riley bellowing the lines in his sonorous tone.
Also, the first poem justin wrote was cutting and saturated with sarcasm, but the second one about opinions, balloons, codeine, thorny-dog-blood-hammer-blood-etc., that one I think, could pass for a Tao Lin or Ellen Kennedy poem.
Or maybe not. I don't write poetry, and there could be nuances present in Tao and Ellen's work that I can't pick out.
Either way, the Comment Wars on Tao's site are always fun to watch/read. Good stuff!
Tao, I'd like to read your upcoming story in Fourteen Hills. Can you email it to me?
Actually, I inadvertently fibbed. I did write a poem years ago, when I first started reading Bukowski.
Chuang Tzu answered this question many centuries ago, but what is the question? I'm alone with 3 cats and a computer. I don't know this Ellen Kennedy. I suspect her of extreme minimalism. Perhaps she wants to simplify her life. That is her prerogative. I am always trying to tackle meaning. My 9 year old Lew is way ahead of me I think. In our story/novella/something in digress (exerpts posted on my blog 4/24) "My Life with the Runaway Bride," he discusses Sartre and Descartes:
"I really want to know if I am therefore I think or I think therefore I am. Will I ultimately attach myself to Descartes or to Sartre? I imagine Sartre will win out in the end, which is strangely comforting, though a greater burden. Thoughtful responsibility is appealing. I've learned that from my bride."What do you think?" I ask the cop. Do you think you think because you are, or do you think you are because you think, or do you suppose it's half a dozen of one and two dozen of the other?"The cop shoots a blank look, gets on his cellular pacifier, and tells his wife to cook the chicken before it spoils...
But excuse the digression. This is what Chuang Tzu said & I think he has more of a point as well as a pointless than any of us.
"Now I am going to make a statement here. I don't know whether it fits into the category of other people's statements or not. But whether it fits into their category or whether it doesn't, it obviously fits into some category. So in that respect it is no different from their statements. However, let me try making my statement.
There is a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. Suddenly there is nonbeing. But I do not know, when it comes to nonbeing, which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something. But I don't know whether what I have said has really said something or whether it hasn't said something."
i liked bear parade, a fast read in a meaningless world. Tao, you strike me as a cross between O'hara and Billy Collins. keep it up. which is to say i agree.
and by the by, poor pessoa was never able to write up to any of his heteronyms.
I have never been to a party.
stop condescending to pessoa
trevor, email for story
firstly, i am only doing what i was told to do. read and discuss.
am not ashamed of my status on this comment thread; nor on this blog. am a 'good' follower.
secondly, i love bear parade. have said it before and would say it 60 more times if someone asked me. i wouldn't even cut and paste it.
am biased against pound, but i love zukofsky. i enjoy the challenge of a few rules when writing a poem. i fall into a state of awe and wonder when i read a poem that hides all the rules -- makes me see past them.
all that said. standards are personal.
and poetry is personal. and poetry is universal.
now, what's the purpose of poetry? is it a class status. poets, up there with priests in the pre-historic tribe? or is poetry for enjoyment, escapism, joy, warm fuzzy (fizzy) feelings. about the sound of the words blood and duck in the same line. and what's wrong with a little less punctuation?
we, as theorists and critics (of life and poetry) and as poets, should distinguish ourselves in terms of our intent. he is a poet who writes in order to say he is a poet. she is a poet who writes poems to make herself smile on the inside. they are poets because they like their own hand writing. i am a poet because i need a place to put all the words i learned today. you are a poet because all your friends are.
the point, intent, of bear parade and its patrons, is the smiling kind. is the aesthetic kind. the sweet, fuzzy (fizzy) hamster-infested kind. is the kind kind that makes the eyes twinkle. makes the elitist groan. it is not a challenge. it is like ice cream. simple and beautiful and makes you a little fatter and a little happier afterwards. bear parade is rightly american, rightly suburban, bear parade is like the ice cream truck that honks its horn at the crest of every cul-de-sac in every neighborhood.
have an ice cream. recite pound all you want. recite wcw. skip rope. stick the chewed up gumball eyeballs from your ice cream mickey mouse to the branch of a tree. be innocent, recite another poem and offer your gum to a squirrel.
this of course, means nothing to the squirrel. we assume.
p.s. it only took me two days to read all the comments. but it took a whole day to scroll back up to the top to post my own comment.
Post a Comment
<< Home