Dear Nancy Pelosi

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Jeff

Postby Telexx » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:17 pm

MASONIC PLOT said:

Politicians, male and female, need to stop WHORING THEMSELVES and do the work of THE PEOPLE.


Although I agree with this statement, I feel it's unlikely to happen anytime soon. To believe that the upper eschalons of the political class of any Western country give a flying fuck about the masses is to resolutely have your EYES WIDE SHUT).

People wearing blinkers shouldn't throw mud?

Again: politics will not save you.

Thanks,

Telexx
User avatar
Telexx
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby MASONIC PLOT » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:21 pm

disregard
Last edited by MASONIC PLOT on Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MASONIC PLOT
 

Postby MASONIC PLOT » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:22 pm

opps
Last edited by MASONIC PLOT on Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MASONIC PLOT
 

Postby MASONIC PLOT » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:23 pm

If an author of a piece of literature so chooses to use a particular way of expressing his or her feelings I believe they are entitled to that. While I agree with your statement that women are often treated unfairly I am not willing to censor a writer and limit the literary tools they have to choose from. Literary figuartive speech is a powerful and useful tool to any writer and one should not be condemned by their choice to use it. In this case the greater good is served by freedom of speech and freedom of expression rather than a limitation of either. Having studied literature at the post graduate level I have read most of the classics and I can tell you that the most famous writers have used phrases, metaphors, similie and imagary far worse than what we seen in the above article. Should we take the role of the Inquisition and condemn and even imprison the writer because of his choice to express himself in a certain manner, much like the French flogged and imprisoned the Marquis de Sade? I think not. Ill take offensive speech over limited speech any day.
MASONIC PLOT
 

Postby Telexx » Tue Nov 14, 2006 7:02 pm

MASONIC PLOT said:

Ill take offensive speech over limited speech any day.


Here, we are treated as adults (erroniously it would seem given some of the nonsense written on this thread!)

Any person is capable of writing any old shite. Look here for example... But surely good writing should help your audience to consider the points you're trying to make (as an author, not you personally). For this to happen the writing should reflect the sensibilities of your intended audience, otherwise you alienate them: they get hung up other perceptions of the writing instead.

Can that point be in dispute?

In the UK we have a comedian Billy Connolly who is quite famous, and who has made a career of being 'lovably offensive'. (He is known in the States too). A degree of shock can be helpful in waking slumbering people, but it takes some skill to do this well.

The article you posted lacked any such skill*. To defend it blindly seems belligerent. To bang on about the classics and literary devices seems a bit much when in reference to the childish scrawlings* you posted orginally.

Thanks!

Telexx

* In My Opinion, obviously...
User avatar
Telexx
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to Fire Pit

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest