Can't say I do. Who was he?Originally Posted by Bewlay Brother
Can't say I do. Who was he?
Maybe I spoke too soon.
I'm waiting to be enlightened. Names sounds Russian. 19th century novelist perhaps? I really like Dostoevsky and Gogol. Maybe I'll check this Josef Stalin fellow out.
Dostoevsky and Gogol are really great literary thinkers and I always got fascinated by these gigantic personality .
1. It's trimester, not semester.
2. You wonked up the quote tags.
3. What are you trying to argue? I thought you said that you agreed with my points.
No ****.
__________________
"Personal note: When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun. So once when I was six, I did. At first the brightness was overwhelming, but I had seen that before. I kept looking, forcing myself not to blink, and then the brightness began to dissolve. My pupils shrunk to pinholes and everything came into focus and for a moment I understood. The doctors didn't know if my eyes would ever heal."
-Pi
Saying a fertilized egg has a "destiny" to have life is a bit trite (they are alive, but so are bacteria and cockroaches, the relevant question is if they are persons). First of all, an embryo may or may not actually have the potential to be a human being, they may lack necessary genetic components to form a viable human being, while still being viable at earlier stages of development. Secondly, the majority of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Third, a potential to be something which has rights does not imply that thing in itself has rights.
"If the national mental illness of the United States is megalomania, that of Canada is paranoid schizophrenia."
- Margaret Atwood
Careful. You are cutting it too far outside of ecosystem. There occur no things in themselves.
Darcy, please tell me you're just jerking Bewlar's chain be saying you don't know who Stalin is. . . .
The posts of Bewlay have nothing to do with the topic at hand, and have nothing to do with literature as well. Why not just ignore his posts? I think his posts would be better suited for some right-wing neo-Nazi posting board. It certainly isn't the kind of stuff that belongs in a discussion about literature.
A different poster, one whose posts are far more relevant to the topic, was kind enough to give a list of some writers and poets that he felt were innovative. I wish to thank him. Others may also wish to share with us the names of writers and poets who they feel are innovative, particularly of the modern and contemporary periods. Other members of the site might enjoy reading those poets and writers very much. (As I said before unless you have permission from the copyright holder please refrain from posting an entire work, just list titles, as posting an entire work that is not yet part of the public domain is against copyright rules. Thank you.)
A different poster brought up the subject of sexuality and literature. I believe that the time has come to end censorship in literature. Writers and poets need greater freedom of creativity. Sexuality is an extremely important part of human nature. To censor sexuality in literature is to impede the creative process, and the creative process is key to creating great literature.
Censorship of sexuality in literature may come in endless forms. It may be of the politically correct variety of censorship, which is a relatively new form of censorship. It may be of the religious extremist variety of censorship, which of course is a very old form of censorship. It may come from the government.
We need to understand that sexuality is natural. Sexuality has a natural place in literature. We should not be censoring it.
"...the ramblings of a narcissistic, self-obsessed, deranged mind."
My poetry, plays, novels, & other stuff on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ntt_athr...or=Wolf Larsen
There are some very "creative" churches of sex. Some claim that De Sade was the only revolutionary ever.
Of course I know who he is. I'm well read. He wrote Fathers and Sons right? See I know.
You really think literature as a whole is censored for sex these days? The Lady Chatterly Obscenity Trial was back in 1959 man. Its old news. Tropic of Cancer is one of my favourite books. Did you just step out of a cryo-chamber? The 50's are long gone.
What you want is sex, sex, sex raining down, thrusted upon us at every turn, rendered as ubiquitous and banal as red brick. You would rape our sense of decency. You sneer at those who regard sex as something more than a crude animalistic urge, those for whom to the act is attached some higher almost spiritual meaning.
Our culture is over-sexed. I turn on a television and see soft-core porn playing on every channel. I walk outside in the summer-time and fancy myself in ancient Sparta.
Considering the clear lack of historical prespecive you showed before, I don't think any of us would have been particularly suprissed had you not know who stalin was.
Whatever. I've heard scholars state that the form of slavery the African Americans endured was perhaps the most brutal in all history. I can think of few example of such large numbers of people being shipped to other continents and kept in drudgery and discrimination for centuries. I'm sure there are some but it is not "typical" as you in your superior intelligence and historical perspective state.
Darcy said:
Darcy is mistaken. He clearly does not understand what I'm saying.You really think literature as a whole is censored for sex these days? The Lady Chatterly Obscenity Trial was back in 1959 man. Its old news. Tropic of Cancer is one of my favourite books. Did you just step out of a cryo-chamber? The 50's are long gone.
What you want is sex, sex, sex raining down, thrusted upon us at every turn, rendered as ubiquitous and banal as red brick. You would rape our sense of decency. You sneer at those who regard sex as something more than a crude animalistic urge, those for whom to the act is attached some higher almost spiritual meaning.
Our culture is over-sexed. I turn on a television and see soft-core porn playing on every channel. I walk outside in the summer-time and fancy myself in ancient Sparta.
I feel that no one has a right to impose their sexual Puritanism on others, and I feel that this is especially true or should be especially true in the world of literature. Who is Darcy or anyone else for that matter to say what should be allowed in literature and what shouldn't? The most important thing here is not to put obstacles in the creative spirit of the writer or poet or painter or sculptor.
Not every writer or poet or painter or sculptor shares Darcy's opinions about sexuality. I defend Darcy's right to write whatever he chooses. But I also defend the right of poets and writers and painters and sculptors to be more free in their creative endeavors.
The important thing is absolute freedom for the writer or poet, whether it be in sexuality or otherwise, provided that the writer is not espousing neo-Nazi filth, which is a different matter entirely.
Darcy's insistence that we live in a literary world free of sexual censorship is incorrect. It is true that sexual censorship in the literary world (and in society in general) loosened during the sexual revolution. However, it seems that since the 1980s the pendulum is swinging the other way. Ihe literary world (and society in general) is becoming more puritanical. This sexual Puritanism, in my opinion, is having a negative impact upon the literary world in the form of censorship.
This censorship takes many different forms, including that of political correctness. But whether this censorship derives from political correctness or religious extremism or government intervention censorship is censorship. It is ugly. It has no place in the literary world. We should defend the right of writers and poets and sculptors and painters to create whatever they shall choose.
Last edited by WolfLarsen; 01-09-2012 at 04:02 PM.
"...the ramblings of a narcissistic, self-obsessed, deranged mind."
My poetry, plays, novels, & other stuff on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ntt_athr...or=Wolf Larsen
I'm done responding to you on this issue. All I say goes in one ear and out the other.
Actually never mind. You took the effort to respond and so shall I.
Wolf if you write brilliant prose or poetry chalk full of sexual content then it will get published and read. If you cheapen and demean sex, reduce it to no more than another mere animal function wholly divested of sanctity, placing it on the same unhallowed plane as defecation, as you did in that poem you posted earlier, people won't respond warmly. Maybe its not puritanism but decency and taste that is the true object of your gripe.
Of the contemporary literature I've read, which admittedly is not much, I've found sex freely depicted. I do not see evidence of the kind of extensive censorship you speak of.
And as far as society goes.... come out from under your rock! Sex is everywhere, its unavoidable, your utopia has arrived.
Last edited by Darcy88; 01-09-2012 at 05:55 PM.
Posting Permissions
