| Author |
Message |
    
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 01:04 pm: | 
|
Somebody else made a point here somewhere that it seems that the Black fiction lauded by the Literary Establishment features characters--preferably female, who are beat down. Slaves, abused women, criminals--
Another thread in the LOVE/Black Chick Lit discussion--why is it that all the characters in the fiction that gets lauded got to be beat down?
In LOVE all the main characters are beat down and dragged out--hopeless. The only strong character is the Mammy figure, L, who poisoned Bill Cosey and is dead when the book starts.
I mean, why don't these writers deal with characters of accomplishment? The story of Toni Morrison herself must be a stirring one--she was born at a time when black women might aspire to be school teacher, nurse beautician, something, and rose to be a Nobel Prize winning professor.
Why do they have to have this soap opera type stuff going on? |
Let's Get Serious
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 02:31 pm: |
|
I "never" once thought of L as a Mammy figure.
You have got to be kidding.
If anything, her ability to be alive and dead at the same time evoked the image of a goddess figure.
|
Let's Get Serious
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 02:35 pm: |
|
Hayden said:
Why do they have to have this soap opera type stuff going on?
I say:
Did you read the book? It wasn't a soap opera--it was a "character study".
Soap operas are books written by Danielle Steele and Harold Robbins.
How are you going to put Toni Morrison in that list?
What is wrong with you?
|
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 02:49 pm: |
|
Hmmmm....Chris Hayden, can't say that i even agree with your characterization of LOVE, as stated above. L as a mammy? You ask, Why don't these writers deal with characers of accomplishment? Are you serious with these questions and statements. Faulkner, Shakespeare, Joyce, ......no one requires them to make "respectable" characters! Pathos and good fiction are almost synomymous.
You're sounding like those vindicationists who only wanna hear the good stuff to demonstrate that black people are intelligent and have contributed to society--ala the progenitors of the Harlem Renaissance, Locke and Johnson.
Similarly, what good fiction, doesn't have drama...unless your're talking about humor....
Your comments are often limited, i think, because you don't explain the actual object of discussion. Instead, you try to do it through comparison or analogy, which leads you to avoid the specificity of the object of analysis. In addition, you place things into typologies, which are only meant for purposes of differentiation not a the analysis in of itself. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 03:28 pm: |
|
I certainly didn't think of "L" as a Mammy figure. She was not some big-bosomed, nurturing servant, shuffling around, dispensing home-spun advice to poor ol troubled souls. She was an aloof, enigmatic presence with keen insight and smoldering passions. |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 03:55 pm: |
|
Cookin', makin sweet potato pies, shufflin' 'round on her po' so' feets--I could smell the flapjacks and see the handkerchief on her head. |
Madame X
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 04:35 pm: |
|
Okay - let's try to break down what "accomplishment" means to us.
Can a character (female) have her behind kicked for breakfast, lunch and dinner, get on drugs, sell her body to get the drugs as well as feed her children (by five different men) all while holding down a nine to five, keeping her kids clean and in school, well mannered and christian -- be a character of accomplishment?
I think yes. Some of you may say no depending on whose "standard" of accomplishment you're measuring her against.
|
JMHO
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 04:41 pm: |
|
Chris, I've come to the conclusion, you've got way too much idle time on your hands.  But I read on an afam lit listserv, where a professor said a student asked, why aren't there any happy characters in Morrison's book. I forgot the exact title. Now I would say any book where all the characters are happy, all the time, is defintely, a soap opera. Why would one want complex, intriguing characters when they can have those cookie-cutters types? |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 04:43 pm: |
|
Madame X:
That kind of character would be great--I was using the standard of Toni Morrison's personal accomplishment because she probably would know more about it and because it she knows triumph over adveristy in real life--
I would probably give that kind of character even more props. I think though the literary establishment would want her moaning on a dirty mattress as the blood flows out of her arm from the absesses and the needle still in it, as the cops shoot one kid, the rats eat another, another passes for white, a fourth becomes a suicide bomber, and the fifth hangs herself in the bathroom as she agonizes over the folly of her misspent life.
Just my opinion. |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 07:08 pm: |
|
Shaking my head.
Hayden you said:
I would probably give that kind of character even more props. I think though the literary establishment would want her moaning on a dirty mattress as the blood flows out of her arm from the absesses and the needle still in it, as the cops shoot one kid, the rats eat another, another passes for white, a fourth becomes a suicide bomber, and the fifth hangs herself in the bathroom as she agonizes over the folly of her misspent life.
NOW. What book by Toni Morrison have you ever read that featured any one of those characters or situations?
Bluest Eye is a classic. Remains the single best book, the most invasive study of colorism (which is different from racism) ever put in a book.
SULA explored the true relationships between women--in ways that most women would never openly talk about their "fears" of other women. Sula is an extremely complex tale. Another book touching a subject that no one has ever done before. Not only that, but there's no name for the subject that was touched.
Song of Solomon...Jazz...TarBaby...
You can't possibly have read any of these books and come to the conclusion that Morrison writes soap operas or that she wollows in losers.
Her books are the most profoundly involving "mazes" I've ever read. Faulkner, Ellison and even Baldwin don't even come close to the key Morrison turns.
What is with you, bro?
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 12:10 am: |
|
Madame X, the question you posed has to do with ethics. Is a woman who writes extraordinary books that resonate with such genuius that they will forever impact on posterity a more accomplished female than one who tries to make the most of the bad decisions she has made in her hard life? As far as I'm concerned, which one is the more accomplished would depend upon on how the hard-luck woman's fatherless children turned out. (Yes, I know that's cold.) LOL |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 10:31 am: |
|
ME:
I stand by my positions. You may shake your head some more. |
AnonymousX
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 12:10 pm: |
|
Sure Chris, just throw everything against the wall, just maybe something will stick.
|
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 10:45 am: |
|
AnonymousX:
Everythang I do
Gots to be funky. |
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 02:43 am: |
|
Yukio and Chris, I think you may have struck gold with your suggesting that Morrison’s "Love" is a fictional "outting" of the randy exploits of the comedian(satyr?) Bill Cosby. I have on good authority - I know several longtime TV actors and producers - that there was indeed a Cosby Show casting couch to which The Coz' made full/thorough usage of (You may recall how especially affectionate 'Heathcliff' was toward 'Claire', at least until Ms. Philicia Ayers Allen became Mrs. Ahmad Rashad.).
And rumor has it that the reason why Cosby was especially generous toward and patient with the free-spirited Lisa Bonet (e.g., featured her in "A Diff'rent World", allowed her to leave/return to Cosby Show, forgave her embarrassing performance in the dreadful "Angel Heart" movie, etc.) was to stave off the possibility of her going public with his lascivious ways.
So perhaps Morrison’s Bill Cosey really is Bill Cosby. |
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 07:01 am: |
|
A little while ago, I thought I might try to offer some 'seriously provocative' commentary to this (indomitable) discussion about Toni Morrison's "Love". But you all have taken this thing so far, wide and deep, all that I can do now is...laugh.
Chris, you especially oughtah be ashamed of yourself for stirring everyone up like you have.
The thing about "L" the mammy is especially funny. And I gotta admit it, I myself kinda saw L to be an "Aunt Jemima" type.
Hey, you know what? Now that I think I think about it. Maybe "L" bump off ol' Bill Cosey because she was the ONLY chick in town dude DIDN'T knock boots with. Maybe if Bill had stirred up L's "chilli sauce" ever now-n-then, she might have trained her 'hemlock' on those shrill harpies surrounding Cosey...so that she could have him all to herself. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 01:42 pm: |
|
ABM:
As a woman, I continue to be offended by the way you and Chris attempt to make a Mammy caricature out of "L". Hattie McDaniel was the quintessential Mammy-type, and she is not who came to mind when I conceptualized "L". "L" was lean and mysterious and introspective, a resolute woman whose smoldering passions rendered her capable of murder. She was also admirable considering that her love for Cosey did not corrupt the concern she had for the women he victimized. Aunt Jemima? I don't think so. |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 02:49 pm: |
|
Cynique, I agree 100%. I never ONCE imagined "L" as any kind of Mammy figure.
But there is a wonderful study/essay in which Bebe Moore Campbell laments the fact that a great many black men see "most black women" as Mammy's whenever those women are being (nurturing or wise). Leanness has nothing to do with it.
That same essay/study talks about how especially dark women are stereotyped by black men according to how they look, level of caring, etc.--usually with a negative outcome.
Yukio has pointed out in several posts how White people are socialized/accepted as the only "normal" people/race--and somehow black men buy into this and tend to see the same behaviors they associate as "admirable" in white women...to be "Mammy-ish", "cow-towing" or "insincere" when extended by black women. It's a very interesting study. Tragic, too, because it suggests that black women suffer from an outside White World set of stereotypes about them--and then must contend with even larger stereotypes in their own personal space by black males, often their own sons.
"Lean and yellow" black women are now starting to be included in these stereotypes for some odd reason.
In many cases, the females don't even realize that these stereotypes are what cause the negative tensions between themselves and black males. It doesn't occur to the women that the men could be so "Pro-black man" and have such "intra-racial hate" (Campbell's word) for their own women, usually the blackest ones. But more than just Campbell's study is proving this to be a fact.
The men usually deny it, because it's been this way in our community for so many hundreds of years that it seems "normal" to them to associate black women with the same stereotypical images that films/media fed to white children.
The same study showed that even most "lighterskinned" females assign these stereotypes to blacker women, because the lighter women have closer social rank/contact with black males and have been socialized to prize their light skin as being the reason they're "much nicer women than dark ones". As I said, however, for some reason the same stereotypes are starting to be applied to the lighter women as well. Which is really new and bizarre.
Bebe Moore Campbell's essay from her study can be found in the black anthology, "HONEY HUSH". It also talks about how other racial groups (especially Koreans) have the same negative energy towards its darker members.
Oh well. My two cents.
|
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 03:36 pm: |
|
Cynique and ME:
As a black man, I'm insulted by Toni putting these mammy figures in her book and thinking we won't call her on it.
As with Bill Cosey's Big Scene at the window--you ought to be mad at her. She's the one writing this stuff! |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 03:47 pm: |
|
What was untrue about Cosey's big scene at the window?
The mother of the CHILD that was urinated on by R. Kelley is taking cash instead of fighting for her child's dignity, as well as the rest of us.
What about that scene in the window was untrue?
I was sitting on the bus stop about 11 years ago (I'm kind of chesty) and this black man in a high rise window stood there and jacked off against the window, staring at me, for the entire time I had to wait for the bus.
I LIKED IT actually. But that's no reference to Morrison's story.
|
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 04:22 pm: |
|
ME:
There is no Bill Cosey. There is no Heed. There is no Christine. What was made up was the whole book. It is listed under fiction.
You get mad at Susan Lucci for what she does on that show, don't you? |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 07:01 pm: |
|
ME: Your 2-cents was right on the money, girlfriend!
All I have to say to you, Chris, is that your perspective is warped. Do you really think that Toni Morrison would give a female figure with a traditionally negative image such an influential role in one of her books? And your persistence in trying to fit "L" into the mammy stereotype, along with your hang-up about Cosey masterbating reveal more about you, than it does about Toni Morrison. BTW, I don't know about ME, but I don't have a problem with Susan Lucci being a super bitch. |
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 10:43 pm: |
|
Ok ladies, I was 'kinda' joking about the "Aunt Jemima" thing. So really, you can lighten up jus' a wee bit.
K?
Cynique, I find it interesting that you (& apparently other women who have read "Love") can calmly rationalize L's killing Cosey, a man who by most accounts was a stand-up guy. I mean, really, I fail to see what Cosey did to justify being murdered.
And enuff with masturbation crap already. I don't condone a grown man flashing his privates to young girls (or anyone else 4 that matter). But honestly, I would respectfully say to anybody (including the illustrious Toni Morrison) that to what and whom a man whacks off to in his own home is his own @#$ing business!
But ME, I must admit responses very well written and provocative. I am not sure I buy the arguments you are making or the premises that maintain it. And some of it sounds like the boilerplate Black Man Bashing (BMB). But your compelling essay makes the phenomenon that you assert appear worthy of further review.
You mind citing the titles of the Campbell study and other books/articles that support this alleged Black man's 'Mammy' fixation?
BTW: ME, how do you know your high-rise whacker wasn't instead fantasizing about the studly guy standing next to you at the bus stop? |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 19, 2003 - 11:34 pm: |
|
ABM, I was the only person at the bus stop. He was across the street about 6 stories up looking down on me and doing that. It was before 6 a.m.
The more I stared back at him and smiled, the more he relaxed and took his time. I even bent over a little bit so he could see my cleavage more.
Another time, I was on a greyhound bus trip and I looked down into the cab of this white guy's truck. He had his thing out masturbating and smiling at me after having "bomped" his horn to get me to look.
I AM CERTAIN...THAT "MOST" females around here have had at least one experience like this.
Men and boys do this type of thing all the time. I have heard many other girls tell me it happened to them, too. We usually laugh about it.
My two guys were young and cute, though. Not old and fatherly like Cosey.
I loved "L".
|
JMHO
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 12:01 am: |
|
ABM, what other females besides Cynique even wrote about the killing of Cosey? Why did you assume that other females calmly rationalize it? You said, "apparently", just want to know how arrived at such a conclusion.
Ironically though all those in the book who thought Cosey could do no wrong, didn't live with him or were allowed in the hotel or on his boat.
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 12:19 am: |
|
ABM, how often do I have to keep reminding that it is Chris who is having a problem with Cosey masterbating in the window, not the author, or the women readers. And I don't think anybody is condoning "L" committing murder. But Cosey was really the architect of his own doom. He was like a driver who caused others to have accidents - until his luck ran out.
ME, the tone of your posts is starting to ring wickedly familiar.... Hummmmm. |
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 01:32 am: |
|
I just don't get what Cosey did that was so villainous that warranted his disparagement...and murder. It seems to me he provided employment and sustenance to a lot of people, he didn't appear to be physically (or even mentally) abusive and he appeared to be loyal to those who were as such with him in spite of having been raised by a man who was an inveterate sell-out.
And we seem to conveniently forget that the only reason why Cosey was made to become so deeply involved in Christine and Heed's lives is Christine's father (his son) dies young. Were Cosey a genuinely callous and evil man, he might have tossed May/Christine out on their quarrelsome keysters the moment after he laid his son to rest. But instead, he continued to provide for them, though that really wasn't his responsibility. And he continued to do that even though he had to know May and Christine were willfully making trouble for him.
Frankly, I think an L would kill a Cosey not to protect and avenge his moneygrubbing granddaughter and wife. She would do the dirty deed because she was crazy jealous that they, not she, rated higher in his life.
And why is it no one has asked Heed and especially Christine to just let bygones be bygones and go on with their respective lives?
Ok, gramps married your best friend. Tuff! That sucks big time. But does that mean you should hate each other for eternity? I just don't get that, especially considering Cosey continued to love and care for both women. Yes, the priority and dynamics of their relationships changed. But with some women, the situation could have been managed. Heck! A lot of sisters in that situations would have eventually concluded that Cosey would eventually become an enfeebled old man that they eventually control, then succeed. So why not just wait things out.
Actually, the biggest villain in this situation was not Cosey: It was May. She selfishly continued to foster resentment/hostility between these 2 erstwhile companions even though any decent women could see that the poor Heed was completely hapless in the situation and that she was wrecking a loving relationship between Christine and Cosey.
Yet no one seems to blame May for what happened.
Yeah, Cosey married a little girl. That, by any standard, is a pretty scummy thing to do.
But be did MARRY her, thus providing her some rights and legal protections and recourse.
Heck! A man of his money/position at that time could have easily defiled then discarded her at his earliest convenience. But he instead to a poor and ignorant little girl - with very limited prospect - from the wrong side of track and made her the wife of the most esteemed and wealthiest Black man in the area.
And considering Heed's woeful family background, Cosey was probably the best deal she might have gotten anyway. Actually, if you follow the fairly predictable progression of her life sans Cosey, you'd probably find her impregnated...probably by an uncle or a cousin...inside of just 3 months after starting her menses. |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 04:25 am: |
|
ABM(and others), your last post says that you don't get it! And this is fine and the way to go! So, i think that Morrison's characterizations weren't persuasive to you. If her characters were persuasive then you should have understood why the characters did what they did...what else is there to say?
From some of your questions, it seems to me that you didn't go along for the ride, but you fought the characters' decisions the entire trip and was disgruntled after they didn't do what you wanted them to do....
ABM, CHris, and ALL:
I think we really need to reread the story, if we're gonna really talk about this....
One thing that hasn't been discussed with much depth is the fact that these women had this love/hate relationship for most of their lives. More importantly, is that Cosey was the genesis, which means that we need to re-consider that these women were dealing with grown folk issues and problems as children, two eleven years old dealing with marriage, physical abuse, and what ever they may have seen around the hotel....remember it was a hotel, and Cosey was a drunk and a playa or should a say man-whore.
ABM, consider, seriously try, what it may have felt like as an eleven year old going on a honeymoon with ya best friends' grandfather. Rember, Heed wanted Christine to go on the Honeymoon and Christine wondered why she wasn't going....now, grown azz women would never consider or think these things.....In other words, part of getting this story requires you to appreciate the emotional stage these girls were when they began with these issues, what seeing your grandfather as little girl must look like...remember, Cosey hated Christine because she had his father's grey eyes....you gotta read the stories and really listen to the details..... |
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 07:57 am: |
|
Yukio (and all others),
When I say I "don't get it" that doesn't mean I don't understand what Morrison's characters are doing and why. What I mean is I am not necessarily buying the rationale behind what they do.
I don't know what you mean by Morrison's characters not being "persuasive" to me or how I "fought" their decisions. I understood and appreciated the characterizations just fine. I found them interesting (if not a bit selfish and cynical). I just disagree with their decision making processes and their behavior, and I apparently disagree with how you (and others, I suppose) appreciate what they did and why. Just because I find Heed, Christine, May and L may be valid literary characters does not mean I fully accept how they behaved.
Okay, for the sake of discussion, lets presume "Love" was a true story. All that business about Cosey being a drunk, playa (or "man-whore") is never told from Bill's perspective. I observe the telling of Cosey alleged womanizing as I would witnessing other secondhand innuendo and gossip. It's kinda like when people see a man with lot's of women around him all the time and everyone assumes he's screwing all of them when in fact he's not. And what many women might characterize as being a drunkard, a man might consider lively and hearty social drinking. So again, because we really don't get Bill's perspective on what he's doing and why, we may draw false and unfair opinions and suppositions.
And even if I bought all the drama of how traumatized Heed and Christine were by Cosey's behavior, I doubt that in that place, time and circumstance that actions like those of Cosey were unique. Girls and women of that time endured and thrived in spite of that. And Christine's/Heed's lot in life compared quite favorably with those most Black females of their epoch. They were well-provided for. They weren't particularly encumbered and discomforted by Whites. I could see two other girls put into Heed/Christine's situation decide - instead of jealously hating each other - to play ol' man Cosey like a fiddle.
Again, if told/observed fairly/honestly, one should conclude that the source the tragedy of "Love" is May's fostering hated between the young girls because May resents being displaced by Heed as the primary Cosey woman. And because of May's ambition to maintain her standing, she likely would have incited hostility and anxiety within Christine for ANY woman Cosey made his wife (no matter her age). Had May been able/willing to handled the situation differently (and maybe herself remarried), everyone might have been better off.
And the following is likely to be where I'll insult many women (& certain highminded men). But as a man, I often find it to be paradoxically hilarious and insulting when women try to define how and when a brothaman should get his row off. I mean, really, what do you all know about whattah brothah gotta do, anyway?
A healthy woman produces ONE reproductive egg every 30 days.
Conversely, the testicles of a healthy man produced about THREE BILLION sperm cells over that same period.
And yet we're suppose to concur on sexual desire and frequency? Of course not.
The fact that most healthy men don't try to screw and jack off every hour of the waking day is in itself a profound example of masculine restraint and maturity.
Ladies, when it comes to living with a penis, you really have to "grow one to know one". |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 10:28 am: |
|
Yukio:
Why do I have to reread the story? No amount of re reading is going to reduce me to fawning worship of the text--which is apparently the only kind of analysis that will suit you.
I repeat my stance--overall it is a good book and I enjoyed it. I did find it flawed. Not fatally so.
By the way, I recommended the book to two black women librarians and they said they thought they would pass because "her books don't make any sense."
Cynique--I am not hung up about Cosey masturbating. I did notice how nobody wanted to comment on it at first, how I had to keep bringing it up it's like that crazy old relative one locks in the basement, I guess--it is a scene like the porking of that guy in Deliverance--begins to take on a significance it should not have--hey, but Toni is the one who put it in there and placed it where she did.
L was a mammy figure. She definitely was not a woman of this age--commenting on how the women opened up their legs, etc. You seem to be awful hung up about this characterization. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 11:55 am: |
|
Chris:
"L" had the typical mindset of women of the 40s and 50s. That does not make her a mammy. Obviously we have two different ideas of what a mammy figure is. I question whether one black woman can be a mammy figure to other black woman. The nurturing Mammy figures originated on southern white plantations. They were faithful female house servants raising and wet-nursing the master's children. Also, if you weren't hung up on the masterbating scene you wouldn't have mentioned it in the first place. It apparently shocked and embarrassed you. Now you're trying to blame Toni for giving it its rightful place in a sequence of events. You also continue to accuse people of fawning over Morrison just because they interpret things differently than you do.
ABM: Nobody deserves to be murdered. That's why it's a crime. In Cosey's case, he just happened to have offended a vindictive woman. "Love" is really a "slice-of-life" book. Who's to say who's guilty or innocent. Shit happens.
Yukio:
I don't think there will be a meeting of the minds on this subject. The book is a like the famous ink blot test. Everybody sees things in a different way.
|
Lambd
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 01:11 pm: |
|
I want a picture of 'Big-Breasted ME' who likes it when men check out her breasts and jack-off. I know someone who could use a picture like that...for...uhhh...medicinal purposes...Not me, of course. Someone else...that I know...We're not close. Just someone I know...who gets off on things like that. |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 01:12 pm: |
|
Hi Cynique,
I only came to the boards a few weeks back. If I'm familiar to you, just know I get that a lot. At work, people always think I remind them of someone they know or something.
Hope I don't sound too bookish. I read a lot.
As for your last post--Tell It!!! You're 100% on the log.
I think these guys are being unfair to Morrison and I'm tripping off of how "sexist" men can be without even realizing it, just as whites can be friendly, well meaning and make very suttle commentary that provides a window, a point of reference to their underlying belief system for blacks.
I'm baffled that Chris Hayden is stuck on "L" being a Mammy. It's absolutely baffling and I wonder what name he would have come up with for her if a White woman had written this same novel about all White women. I seriously doubt that he would see the conservative Swedish cook at the hotel as a "Mammy".
I never gave much thought to Bebe Moore Campbell's study on this issue, I was just stunned to see it in practice and to realize that she is right. Many black men do have "automatic pilot" when it comes to black women's representations. "L", who was a very nuanced and intricate character with lots of layers was reduced to nothing more than a "Mammy".
Why don't they just say, "That bitch killed Cosey! Cann't stand her!?" That I could accept and understand. But not her being a Mammy.
ABM is so full of himself to think women want to control men's libido or are "interested" in its workings in the first place.
Many men, like Cosey did in the window, and like the guys I encountered who masturbated in front of me (to my admitted amusement), just behave like dirty dogs.
There is a bathroom for privacy if men need to do this every two hours. Who can judge you or police you when you choose discretion over making a Social Statement with your genitals in front of young nubile women?
Yukio's post was right, too.
BTW, Yukio. Are you Japanese or mixed with Asian and Black? I'm half Filipino is why I ask.
|
Lambd
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 01:20 pm: |
|
OMG! Half Philipino? You are obviously intelligent and have a great sense of humor. You are probably beautiful as well. |
yuko
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 02:28 pm: |
|
ABM and Chris H:
I'm not sure if you two, particularly CH, know that i don't have anything against either of you. In fact, this is purely intellectual exchange. I take literature seriously, however. So when i discuss literature, i'm constantly searching to get as much from it as i can.
With that said, lets begin:
ABM:"When I say I "don't get it" that doesn't mean I don't understand what Morrison's characters are doing and why. What I mean is I am not necessarily buying the rationale behind what they do."
Gotcha! I was actually trying to say what you said. I should've never used the phrase "don't get it."
"I don't know what you mean by Morrison's characters not being "persuasive" to me or how I "fought" their decisions. I understood and appreciated the characterizations just fine. I found them interesting (if not a bit selfish and cynical). I just disagree with their decision making processes and their behavior, and I apparently disagree with how you (and others, I suppose) appreciate what they did and why. Just because I find Heed, Christine, May and L may be valid literary characters does not mean I fully accept how they behaved."
Hmmmm....i believe that when we read literature, it is the author's responsibility to persuade the reader, to make the character's actions not just reasonable or believable but that there wasn't anything else that the character could do but what he or she did. This personalizes the character, makes them christine rather than any upper class black girl with a problematic family life. So ABM, i'm discussing less of your appreciation or understanding and more of whether or not Morrison's characterizations convinced or persuaded you! For example, i was more persuaded by the behavior of the women, but not by Romen, especially his first scene, though i liked what she tried to do and what i meant in the overall narrative.
CH:I'm not interesting in you fawning over the novel. I don't care. You waste too much time thinking everything is about you. Are you masterbating? I made the suggestion to everyone(including myself), not just you. I made the suggestion, because it didn't seem like it was considered in our engagements, that it was just details.
Your "btw" comments had what purpose? Seems irrelevant to the actual text...lets not talk if we're not gonna stick to the topic!
Cynique: There should be different interpretations, of course. The "meeting of the minds" phrase suggests that folk have put work into understanding something....that there is some expertise, not necessarily through credentialization but through effort. |
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 02:38 pm: |
|
MAN! This is fun! |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 02:39 pm: |
|
ME:
As far as i know, i'm the average african american, part african, european, and native american. Unfortunately, i can't be specific, as in the particular african, european, and native american nationalitie and/or tribe. One day, when i get the time, i'll try to make this known so that i can teach my children(that i don't have...lol!). |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 02:46 pm: |
|
abm, are we square...or clear? |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 07:33 pm: |
|
Yukio:
Thanks for straightening me out on the specifics of the phrase a "meeting of the minds". Guess that's what I get for telling Chris" he's misusing the word "MAMMY". LOL
ME:
You have a Kola Boof vibe, but I'll take you at your word when you say you are who you are.
ABM:
Glad you're enjoying yourself.
LMBD says:
I want a picture of 'Big-Breasted ME' who likes it when men check out her breasts and jack-off. I know someone who could use a picture like that...for...uhhh...medicinal purposes...Not me, of course. Someone else...that I know...We're not close. Just someone I know...who gets off on things like that.
Cyniques responds: That's so funny. You crack me up. |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 07:42 pm: |
|
Cynique, Kola who? What an outrageous name!
Is that supposed to be a writer with a name like that?
She must do children's books.
|
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 08:18 pm: |
|
Cynique, I consider this to be a delightful form of mental 'masturbation'.
Yukio: "Hmmmm....i believe that when we read literature, it is the author's responsibility to persuade the reader, to make the character's actions not just reasonable or believable but that there wasn't anything else that the character could do but what he or she did."
I disagree with you here. No matter how well-written or interesting a book is, I still reserve the right to "disagree" with what its characters see, think and do. Morrison does not have to fully convince me to buy-in to the rationale of L, Heed, Christine, etc. for me to appreciate "Love". I am not even criticizing "Love". And I surely have not expressed any unflattering commentary about Morrison's book. I am just examining it from a different perspective.
And Yukio, as always, we are "'Kool' & The Gang".
ME, you must be quite the looker to engender such lascivious behavior from strangers. Got any centerfold pictures you're willing to share? If not, care to sit for some 'tastefully done' nude pics for Yours Truly? <<wink>> |
Children's Book Author
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 09:49 pm: |
|
Hi Me,
Why would somebody with the name "Kola" write children's books? Was that a compliment to children's books or a slam?
Children's Book Author |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 10:13 pm: |
|
Hi Children's Book Author,
Why are there so many children's books named "Kola"? LOL
Your guess is as good as mines.
I think in Africa, Kola is the #1 favorite snack choice of most children. Also think Chinua Achebe explained the social importance and value of Kola in his book "Things Fall Apart". It is apparently something that African men have eaten traditionally to give them "strength".
In reality, it creates a temporary "high".
P.S. I checked online and found a children's book by Kola Boof called "Koi and the Kola Nuts" or something like that.
Your ball
|
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 10:23 pm: |
|
Also "Children's Book Author"
Why would an author of children's books post poems about what a big shapely buttocks she has and how "anonymous" white women can't compare to her Queenly derriere?
I'm speaking of Sister Sherri Sanna (or whatever her name is)
Just thought I'd ask since I for one wouldn't ever be defined solely by a body part.
Although I've got some great ones.
|
JMHO
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 01:06 am: |
|
ABM, May certainly has to accept her blame in the feud between Heed and Christine but then that doesn't mean that Cosey is blameless.
So, his wife, the cook at the hotel who had known and worked for him since she was a teenager, and his fishing buddy says he was unfaithful but since you don't hear directly from Cosey then it must not be true. Ooookay.
|
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 03:30 am: |
|
ABM:
Of course you have the right to disagree. Again, i'm not talking about you appreciating the story. We're constantly changing words, here. The sentences you quoted, i never said anything about "appreciating" the book. I'm purely talking about the characters' behavior. I appreciate the book, but i wasn't convinced by ROmen's character.
In addition, i've never discussed flatter....i'm talking about the book not the person. Please don't confuse what Chris Hayden says i believe with what i've actually said about the book.
Also, don't think Cosey's voice is necessary. It would be a different book! The book is not about him, but how what he has done effected two woman, thus we see how they deal with him and eachother....I have a problem with the nature of your analysis, and perhaps it is wrong, but i'll say it anyway, for you to correct and/or comment.
It seems that your desire to hear his story is because of a suspicion we, society, have against unrespectable women who tell ya they hurt and you see the blood dripping down her scared leg, torn dress, and bruised throat. We say that it is her fault, because she should have done such and such.....and the man goes without any censure, any responsibility...this is what your comments suggest to me ABM, and ironically this is part of what the story is really is about! |
Lambd
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 11:36 am: |
|
Did I miss something? Are 'Children's Book Author'
and 'SSS' one in the same? Holy Discussion Board Moderator, Batman! It's the old 'identity switch-up' trick! Did you know about this, C-Neek? Am I the last to know? Are my posts so infantile that my 'friend' will never get a peek at ME's, uh...medicines? |
ABM
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 01:02 pm: |
|
Yukio, the following is in response to your "December 21, 2003 - 03:30 am" post:
Paragraph(PGH) 1: I can't/won't respond to what you think of Chris' supposed views. And we are going in around in circles here. So I'll just leave that be.
PGH 2: I don't disagree with your comments. But I personally would have enjoyed knowing more about Cosey's views. AGAIN, that does not diminish Morrison's book. And I accept that for you and others "Love" said/did all you expected and required. But surely you can't expect EVERYONE who reads "Love" to fully share your perspective.
I doubt that Morrison herself would expect (or even want) everyone to accept and appreciate every bit of everything she's written. I think we would all agree much of what we enjoy about Morrison's books is they provokes confusion, disagreement and exposition. Our enduring debates about "Love" prove she's still gettin' it done.
PGH 3: That is a very intriguing (& graphic) bit of conjecture. But it does NOT reflect how I think/feel about rape and domestic violence/abuse (or whatever it is you appear to allude to). And it also is NOT relevant to our discussion.
Actually, your comments smack of the typical BMB dogma that is used to trump views that differ from your own. And I am amazed that feminists/womanists such as yourself fail to see the inherent contradiction of incessantly recounting alleged female victimization to as a tool to achieve gender/sex equality. |
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 02:15 pm: |
|
OK Lambd, Cynique and Children's Book Author,
I'm getting like WAAAAAY confused.
Anyone want to clue me in on the whole Kola thing? I'm going crazy with the suspence at this point.
(((((what you saying in English?)))))
________________________________________
YUKIO....I totally agree with the point you made to ABM, although I get the sneaking suspicion that ABM is something of an undercover feminist himself. I just think he's pissed cuzz "the man" got toasted in the end and I sense that he and Chris Hayden both have an aversion to black women's literature in general, they came into reading the book with a stigma in their eyes. Especially Chris, who I can tell resents Morrison's acclaim.
Just my two cents.
|
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 10:53 am: |
|
Let me see. Time to take a few names around here:
ME:
"CH has an aversion to black women's literature in gneral. He came into reading it with a stigma in their eyes, I resent Morrison's acclaim"
Yes, and the world is flat.
ABM:
Give it to them!
Yukio:
Oh, you kid! I was listening to a bunch of Funkadelic music this weekend and got to thinking about you--I see why now!
What song is this from? If you will suck my soul, I will lick your funky emotions!
No I am not masturbating--not now, anyways. Does this go along with those sticky gooey double engendered renderings that you were talking about before?
ME:
There is no L. There is no Cosey. They are made up characters in a book. Fiction. I feel nothing about L one way or another. L is a collection of words. A total construct. I could have construed L as a green, 2 headed Martian. As a reader of a work of fiction, that is my right.
Cynique:
Somebody else who used to post around here (who hmmm) said you like analyzing folks. That's allright. That's all part of the game. Put something here, you can get analyzed. But let me tell you one thing you need to know before you can do a thorough job--
I DEFY analysis.
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 11:41 am: |
|
Chris:
I know you defy analysis. That's why I didn't analyse you. You are just under the impression that I did, although I don't know why since I never asked you any probing questions or delved into your psyche. |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 11:42 am: |
|
There is a real problem here—in this thread and in general. The problem is that once a person disagrees with someone, book, etc…., the person who is disagreed with often assumes that (a) that it is a personal attack (b) that the disagreement is actually about protecting an author, one self, an ideology (c) that there is no room for intellectual debate and (d) that disagreement for purposes of being right or “winning” rather than for intellectual exchange and education.
I’m sure there are others that each of us could add to this short list.
ABM, you stated: “And I surely have not expressed any unflattering commentary about Morrison's book. I am just examining it from a different perspective.”
I stated: “In addition, i've never discussed flatter....i'm talking about the book not the person. Please don't confuse what Chris Hayden says i believe with what i've actually said about the book.”
You stated: Paragraph(PGH) 1: I can't/won't respond to what you think of Chris' supposed views. And we are going in around in circles here. So I'll just leave that be.
This is fine. Yet, I never addressed a question of flattery, but somehow, for some reason, you mention it. Why?
Also, you state: “PGH 2: I don't disagree with your comments. But I personally would have enjoyed knowing more about Cosey's views. AGAIN, that does not diminish Morrison's book. And I accept that for you and others "Love" said/did all you expected and required. But surely you can't expect EVERYONE who reads "Love" to fully share your perspective.”
Now, my comments about Cosey pertain to what the story was about. When I wrote my first short story, most of my readers said that the story was good, but that they weren’t sure if I needed to treat all characters equally, even though structurally and thematically the character was essential to the story, ie Cosey, but in terms of voice and perspective the character was unessential to the actual story. I changed place in the story, and though the voice was reduced, their significance to the story was magnified. I told you what I expect from all authors, not Morrison in particular. And, indeed, these expectations pertained to craft, primarily character development and perspective, i.e. who narrates the story and what purpose does this voice serve. Perhaps my comments were unclear?
Nevertheless, somehow from my comments you get that I believe that “Love” said/did all I expected and required. And you even had the audacity to state “But surely you can't expect EVERYONE who reads "Love" to fully share your perspective.” These comments have nothing to my discussion of character development. Your comments suggest that I don’t allow room for debate, yet there is no evidence to suggest that I hold such a position. There is only disagreement, but always rooms for discussion.
I state:
“It seems that your desire to hear his story is because of a suspicion we, society, have against unrespectable women who tell ya they hurt and you see the blood dripping down her scared leg, torn dress, and bruised throat. We say that it is her fault, because she should have done such and such.....and the man goes without any censure, any responsibility...this is what your comments suggest to me ABM, and ironically this is part of what the story is really is about!”
You state: “PGH 3: That is a very intriguing (& graphic) bit of conjecture. But it does NOT reflect how I think/feel about rape and domestic violence/abuse (or whatever it is you appear to allude to). And it also is NOT relevant to our discussion.
I made the supposition for your opinion, and you’ve made one, so Thank You! Unfortunately, instead of responding to the comment, you defend yourself. I do think the comments are relevant to our discussion. The point I attempted to make was that when people are already labeled as guilty or unrespectable, such as the “whore” or the “homeless” person, we often prejudge them and assume other participants, often the affluent, respectable, hard working, Christian, etc, are guiltless and redeemable. In other words, it becomes a question of good v. bad, or other rigid dualities, which lead to censuring one and accepting the falibility of the other, where as in literature, perhaps i'm being romantic, even the worst person can be redeemable or have redeemable qualities. I should have made this clear, for my comments are general, but specific to the book. Many of your comments pardon Cosey’s behavior, but you dismiss Christine’s and Heed’s behavior unacceptable. And you seem to want to redeem Cosey, although the story is about Christine and Heed.
Here are some of the things you’ve said, which encourage me to make my comments:
“Cynique, I find it interesting that you (& apparently other women who have read "Love") can calmly rationalize L's killing Cosey, a man who by most accounts was a stand-up guy. I mean, really, I fail to see what Cosey did to justify being murdered.”
Cosey was a stand-up guy? Cosey was a dog, but somehow if one believes this then they believe his death was rationalize. Do you assume that woman are purely either/or….this or that?
“I observe the telling of Cosey alleged womanizing as I would witnessing other secondhand innuendo and gossip. It's kinda like when people see a man with lot's of women around him all the time and everyone assumes he's screwing all of them when in fact he's not. And what many women might characterize as being a drunkard, a man might consider lively and hearty social drinking. So again, because we really don't get Bill's perspective on what he's doing and why, we may draw false and unfair opinions and suppositions.”
Here, you don’t believe these women because it is secondhand innuendo and gossip? It seems like you’re just suspicious of women’s tales about men. In “LOVE” you receive the perspectives from women and Sandler, who said that Cosey told him of his philandering; Remember, Cosey divulged much to Sandler when they went on fishing trips. Also, “L” said that Cosey never lied to her; finally, he left his property to his mistress. These are facts; they are not gossip or secondhand innuendo. It seems like your read the novel with this suspicion.
“And even if I bought all the drama of how traumatized Heed and Christine were by Cosey's behavior, I doubt that in that place, time and circumstance that actions like those of Cosey were unique. Girls and women of that time endured and thrived in spite of that. And Christine's/Heed's lot in life compared quite favorably with those most Black females of their epoch. They were well-provided for. They weren't particularly encumbered and discomforted by Whites. I could see two other girls put into Heed/Christine's situation decide - instead of jealously hating each other - to play ol' man Cosey like a fiddle.”
Your right! Their experiences aren’t unique, but does this disqualify their value? Again, since women have lived despite their circumstances, does that disqualify their experiences or does this make acceptable Cosey’s? Again, if the characters were different, then it would’ve been a different story. Work with what did happen. All of your comments suggest that you don’t feel that these characters’ experiences and plight have very little value, because “they were well-provided for” “they would have compared quite favorable with those particularly of their epoch.” Are we talking about fiction or who’s the most exploited? I guess we’re different types of readers.
"Actually, your comments smack of the typical BMB dogma that is used to trump views that differ from your own. And I am amazed that feminists/womanists such as yourself fail to see the inherent contradiction of incessantly
recounting alleged female victimization to as a tool to achieve gender/sex equality."
I’m not bashing you or Cosey. In fact, my comments says, “It seems that your desire to hear his story is because of a suspicion we, society, have against unrespectable women who tell ya they hurt and you see the blood dripping down her scared leg, torn dress, and bruised throat. We say that it is her fault, because she should have done such and such…” There is no gender identification. We, includes myself, the community, etc…. I’m not talking about “Love” not a strategy to achieve gender/sex equality. Again, where does this come from? How did we get to gender equality? You seem to read so much into my comments that you devalue and obfuscate what I actually say. |
Yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 11:50 am: |
|
CH:
If you were trying to be funny, i don't get it.
Also, is it possible for you to discuss women and men or anything else without taking a socalled "man" position?
I believe we all can think without our sex constantly entering the discusion. Mine never has! |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 11:57 am: |
|
LMBD:
C-Neek has no comment to make on the true identity of SSSS - oops I mean "ME". I do think that you and your um - "horny friend" can get all the titillation you want from her if you just egg her on.
|
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 12:27 pm: |
|
Yukio:
You have to get used to the rough cut and thrust of cyberspace debate. We are not in a university debating hall. You must be in academia in some fashion. School has been out for me for many years.
Someone may well assume abc or d (from your examples) above. There is no way you can keep someone from doing it. The proper way to respond is to ask someone if they have done abc or d. If they respond yes, then you can go from there. This is not an academic journal subject to any rules other than those Troy and Thumper impose. It is open to all--people who argue with emotion, who use sarcasm, who use what they think is wit--they may fall flat on their faces with it but they have placed in their two cents, just like someone who would come forth with scholarly citations.
Now, about whether I was being funny. You asked me if I am masturbating--you must have missed that part, go back and read that--and by the way, you misspelled it--I figured one good--well it wasn't good, it was rather limpid, in fact--funny deserves another.
Would I be incorrect to catergorize your attitude (at least in this discussion) as "controlling"? Just a question here.
Why do I have to take a "man" position? I don't know if I have to. I did not know I was taking a "man" position. What is a "man position?
Why do you have to take a "Yukio" position?
|
ME
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 01:17 pm: |
|
When I read "LOVE"--my heart broke for Christine.
I'm really sure why, but it just seemed to me like she was dogged out.
Did anyone else feel kind of sorry for her?
|
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 01:27 pm: |
|
ME:
Now that's where Morrison did a masterstroke. See one of the things that made the "revolution" go sour was the way the brothers were dogging out the sisters (without whom there could be no revolution, as the brothers were fine for mixing it up with somebody but when it came down to doing the down and dirty grunt work they would leave it to the sisters--not to mention all the reactionary sexual attitudes)--when I read about Christine's story my heart broke for what could have been and how it was thrown away--like the Communists hierarchy who refused to admit racism in their ranks the men could not believe they were dogging sisters, raping them, etc.
I remember I got put out of one so-called revolutionary organization because they were going to make the sisters do stuff I thought was prostitution--another because this revolutionary, who was trying to get us to free Angela Davis, was beating his wife.
Christine, for me, stood for this sister who had sacrificed her own possibilities in life for this--for what--SOS. For what, it seems, never could have been.
I know, ladies. You'll say, "That was cool back in the day CH, but what have you done for us lately?" |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 01:49 pm: |
|
Chris Hayden:
“You have to get used to the rough cut and thrust of cyberspace debate. We are not in a university debating hall. You must be in academia in some fashion. School has been out for me for many years.”
Are telling me my rights or some protocol of discourse? Sounds like school to me!
“Someone may well assume abc or d (from your examples) above. There is no way you can keep someone from doing it. The proper way to respond is to ask someone if they have done abc or d. If they respond yes, then you can go from there. This is not an academic journal subject to any rules other than those Troy and Thumper impose. It is open to all--people who argue with emotion, who use sarcasm, who use what they think is wit--they may fall flat on their faces with it but they have placed in their two cents, just like someone who would come forth with scholarly citations.”
Who’s making the rules, Chris? It seems like you are! This reminds me of something I did and Cynique corrected me…… My comments have nothing to do with being “scholarly” …citations, academic codifications, etc…. You seem adverse to academics; if that is the case, don’t project your aversion of academics on me.
“Now, about whether I was being funny. You asked me if I am masturbating--you must have missed that part, go back and read that--and by the way, you misspelled it--I figured one good--well it wasn't good, it was rather limpid, in fact--funny deserves another.”
Gotcha! I remember! I asked if you were masturbating because you made my comments about you (self-aggrandizement) and it pertained to posters in general.
”Would I be incorrect to categorize your attitude (at least in this discussion) as "controlling"? Just a question here.”
I ask you the same question! I would say no, however. My post is about interpretation not what should and should not be said and how! My post basically says that a disagreement doesn’t mean that one cannot dialogue, that the nature of the disagreement has to be personal, etc…. I’m not telling people what to do. I’m, on the other hand, stating that there are others reasons for disagreement besides personal ones, that disagreement is not in itself conflictive and personal. Much of our discussion, for example, on “LOVE” has been infused with the assumption that people think what they think about the book is based mostly on gender. I’ve disagreed with this position, while you have mostly affirmed it. Again, this is part of the problem, because if we try to re-interpret someone’s interpretation or depiction of a novel, music, movies, or life situations in general based upon out knowledge that the person is a male or female then we can miss or not grasp much of the content of what they say. This is not to say that the person’s sex doesn’t matter, but there are other variables, and one often doesn’t know exactly how one’s sex fits in another’s analysis.
"Why do I have to take a "man" position? I don't know if I have to. I did not know I was taking a "man" position. What is a "man position?"
Sorry. It should have said “so called male position” A male position or gendered position is when we speak from the so called perspective a our sex, as if one man can really represent the position of all men. For example, when I was in school, I as often asked by liberal white students and professors, “ Well, what do black people think?” Sometimes, I was silent, but once I would said something like, “I don’t know! I don’t represent all black people…I’ve never been to Africa or the Caribbean, and I’ve only been down south a couple of times, but once I make these trips, gather the some oral history, I’m get back to you!” They never asked me again! Now, am I a black person? Yes! Did I grow up with black people? Yes! Could I have answered some of their questions? Sometimes, but I would’ve been speaking from very limited perspective of what some black people thought. Even though I believed I knew everything, I knew that as much as I knew I couldn’t ever represent the voice of a race, not even of African Americans. This is a long way, all me piss, shave, get a hard one, etc…but there a individual things, things that pertain to the variety of life…race, class, nationality, etc…that all men don’t share…which his the case with black people, women, whites, etc……
“Why do you have to take a "Yukio" position? “
My position includes my gender, race, ethnicity, etc...class, my politics...but also my love for dialogue and engagement, .... In discussions that don’t require me to consider my sex, I attempt not to introduce it in my position, though of course my sex is very much apart of me, and therefore my ideas and thought process.
|
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 02:03 pm: |
|
Sorry Chris...for the misspellings, etc...
I should have said: This is a long way, all me saying that all men piss, shave, get a hard on, etc....but there a individual things, things that pertain to the variety of life…race, class, nationality, etc…that all men don’t share…which is also the case with black people, women, whites, etc……
|
Watching and Listening
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 05:30 pm: |
|
Y'all should just do it and get it over with. |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 25, 2003 - 03:22 am: |
|
ya can't watch, but listen closer....and maybe u would change ya suggestion. |
|
Email This Page