Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: the prickly pear

Expand Messages
  • louise
    Trinidad Cruz, If sweet Lou is a reference to me, your penultimate paragraph is odious in the extreme. Now, I believe true philosophers can be self-
    Message 1 of 3 , Nov 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Trinidad Cruz,

      If 'sweet Lou' is a reference to me, your penultimate paragraph is
      odious in the extreme. Now, I believe true philosophers can be self-
      moderating, but that's an idealist position. It is still Susan's
      decision when and how to moderate, and whether to kick or ban
      anyone, something thankfully rare on this list. So what I am about
      to say is purely my own opinion.

      First, the facts. I do not drink Jesus' blood. I have never even
      taken communion, or participated, if you prefer different
      terminology, at the Lord's table, though it has been offered to me,
      for example when I first thought I might have become a Christian, at
      an Anglican church in West Bridgeford, Nottingham. And I do not
      drink your blood, you sick fantasist: how dare you make such an
      accusation, you who suggest it is I who resort to 'cryptic
      mysticism'. Overcome your intellectual laziness, and you will find
      plenty of rigorous arguments from me in the archives.

      Your whole message here is a rant. It is not argument, it is not
      philosophy, it is not existentialism. It is literature. Take the
      beam out of your eye, you pseudo-imperialist, and learn some manners.

      Louise

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "cribprdb" <trinidad@i...> wrote:
      >
      > "Here we go 'round the prickly pear"
      >
      > And so sweet Lou, you anglo-loined tweedy toothed Christian
      > prophetess, shall we all gather at the river? Which river, the
      Jordan,
      > or the Thames, or perhaps the poisonous Styx? - though I am not so
      > certain the coin of your modern realm will suffice to pass you well
      > across. Implicit in all things is the fact that not every fools
      word
      > falls dead on the winds of time to the ground unheard ever again by
      > human ear, but rather what is spoken and written in error goes on
      in
      > ear and eye of the fool - a never ceasing birth of sayer and seer
      into
      > foolishness. Indeed the only cure of it is truth, that great
      fortune
      > of accidental letters the sound and sight of which most often pass
      > unnoticed, and always elude the fool so fascinatingly engaged by
      and
      > in his prideful fearsome fairy tales and the beloved human edifice
      > rising inevitably of such slothful linguistic failure. This then is
      > all the secret works of the spinners and spewers: that the power of
      > words is not in the saying and writing, but roars out in the
      hearing
      > and reading; and all such outwardly directed attempts at verbal
      > intellectual conquest end up inwardly self-effecting and
      > self-demoting, because the sound and sight of such mistake can
      never
      > end for this kind of verbal perpetrator except through sweet
      chance of
      > truth. Only truth can make the error into record and pass it from
      > wasting life on to its death and uselfulness. Without the truth the
      > error lives again and again and cannot be killed. The end of
      something
      > has commenced, and the taste of the saying of it is bitter, but
      then
      > no one would ever tear the damn thing down so it is built until it
      > falls under its own weight. So sing joyfully in unison of those
      sweet
      > chains, and labor heartily in the hewing and shaping of men, until
      the
      > thing is done and falls down about your head. I believe, I
      believe, I
      > believe, I believe in Faeries, oh Tink!
      >
      > I saw the dark little Dane just the other day, in bad stomach
      eating
      > pages of Lindsay, mumbling Auden librettos out of tune. Fame arose
      of
      > the convenience of political adversity for that cocky little fire
      > chief. I wouldn't change a thing in his world, hell he earned it.
      He
      > may have scared babies into hysterical laughter, but the truth is
      some
      > babies just laugh out of a robust joy at being alive and loved, to
      > think otherwise is perverse.
      >
      > I don't think you're fun, and I'm not interested in having fun. As
      it
      > has always been with your ilk, when faced with challenging argument
      > you resort to cryptic mysticism, slathering histrionic moralizing,
      and
      > appeal to authority. Furthermore it is throughout your recorded
      > history that you would kill me and my family if you could, or at
      the
      > least look the other way while we died. It's not the blood of Jesus
      > you drink, it's mine. I am the son of my dead and they lived and
      died
      > were often killed for my days of life.
      >
      > The truth requires no moderation, and in this age there is already
      no
      > moderation in hope.
      >
      > Puerto Rican History X
      > Trinidad Cruz
    • cribprdb
      So driven then down to the river, collected up with sword or gun, we never understood the ruckus, challenged as we were there with baptism or death. Most of us
      Message 2 of 3 , Nov 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        So driven then down to the river, collected up with sword or gun, we
        never understood the ruckus, challenged as we were there with baptism
        or death. Most of us just wanted peace and to calm that white fanatic
        adventurism enough to allow for life. There was no philosophical
        change then in us, just an effort at co-existence and peace, but Jesus
        was never content, and could never get enough. Eventually we died and
        left that worthless seed of error behind in our children, and all over
        and over again reproduced the terrifying Christo-fantasy in our own
        bloodline. The choice for peace was authentic, but not the choice for
        Jesus, and it was a peace that never came at all, because of a Jesus
        hungry for power and unashamed of human bloodshed. So today what
        Christian is authentic, all spawned of philosophical heredity,
        intellectual parasitism, flouted history and amnesia? And the way of
        Jesus remains the same, the lurking dormant parasite, driving hosts to
        kill hosts, for its life is perpetuated and agrandized always in new
        children. All ideas of Gods are speculations in the face of the fear
        of death, a paradoxical intellectual mutation of an initially
        authentic choice for peace and human life. No choice for religion is
        authentic, and without new children it will die out. What hysteria
        began, hysteria will end. Hysterical intellectual improvisation is the
        most likely cause of sub-conscious biological mutation. So say your
        sooth in your sickness unto death.

        Trinidad Cruz

        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@y...> wrote:
        >
        > Trinidad Cruz,
        >
        > If 'sweet Lou' is a reference to me, your penultimate paragraph is
        > odious in the extreme. Now, I believe true philosophers can be self-
        > moderating, but that's an idealist position. It is still Susan's
        > decision when and how to moderate, and whether to kick or ban
        > anyone, something thankfully rare on this list. So what I am about
        > to say is purely my own opinion.
        >
        > First, the facts. I do not drink Jesus' blood. I have never even
        > taken communion, or participated, if you prefer different
        > terminology, at the Lord's table, though it has been offered to me,
        > for example when I first thought I might have become a Christian, at
        > an Anglican church in West Bridgeford, Nottingham. And I do not
        > drink your blood, you sick fantasist: how dare you make such an
        > accusation, you who suggest it is I who resort to 'cryptic
        > mysticism'. Overcome your intellectual laziness, and you will find
        > plenty of rigorous arguments from me in the archives.
        >
        > Your whole message here is a rant. It is not argument, it is not
        > philosophy, it is not existentialism. It is literature. Take the
        > beam out of your eye, you pseudo-imperialist, and learn some manners.
        >
        > Louise
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.