A Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop-ist Manifesto

A Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop-ist Manifesto
by Wolf Larsen

1) Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii! Zippity-Boppity-Hoppity-Sing!

2) Tomorrow is the zip-zap-zing that we should all bop about!!

3) The time has come to hoppity-hop and Bopity-bop and Doo-doo everywhere!

4) Doo-doo is the spiritual and spherical equivalent of Schmipadee-do--dism! Long live Schmipadee-do--dism! Long live Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop-ism! Long live individualism! Let every living human being on this planet become his or her own great unique ism! Live your life like a great unique ism that belongs to you and no one else because you're ism is yours, and no one else's! Individualism now! Individualism forever! Creativity now! Creativity forever!

5) Dong-ding-who!op is exactly the yippeeeeee we’re talking about! We're talking about the "sum of the hysteria of all the chaos in the universe, or something." These are the great poetic words of the de-facto founder of this great artistic/literary movement Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop!

"because you're ism is yours, and no one else's! Individualism now!"

It is your ism, not you're ism.

No other way to respond, except that it is too bad the greedy vicious capitalistic piggish conservative bigoted literary high-upper scoundrels reject things like this because they are so prudish they can't see how brilliant and paradigm-shattering this is and how it opens doors that will never be closed again.

I'd be interested to discover what your intention was in writing and posting this on here.

Presumably you're after feedback - but would you prefer us to tell you to stick to what you do best and ignore any constructive criticism or helpful suggestions - leave it exactly as it is and not be 'derailed'? Or are we invited to have our opinion concerning it - and air it on here?

I'm curious, seriously... as I imagine most of us are. What's this all about?

H

All I know is that Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop is an actual name of a man who was recently arrested (I forget for what), which this is obviously a reference to. What the hell Wolf is actually talking about, I don't know,

And I've mentioned this before, Wolf, and I'll mention it again--the extreme overuse of exclamation points is overwhelmingly distracting. It made this nearly unreadable (though much wasn't needed to cross that bridge).

Welcome to Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop-ism! This is a new literary movement! You can see the latest Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop-ist poem in the poetry section. It is entitled ?21st Century oPetry – Yoetrp – Tyroep AnEbodi?

Thanks for clearing the matter up so succinctly. I'll leave you to "play" at being a writer.

H

You must now bomb Hill with a cream puff to seal the issue and unfinish the jobodoodoo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WolfLarsen

Live your life like a great unique ism that belongs to you and no one else because you're ism is yours, and no one else's! Individualism now! Individualism forever! Creativity now! Creativity forever!

We're talking about the "sum of the hysteria of all the chaos in the universe, or something."

---

The guy who named himself Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop bears a striking resemblance to Charles Manson. He was also caught carrying around a loaded handgun.

Your call for absolute individuality, for hysteria and chaos, for total maximum uniqueness, only goes to show how unfamiliar you are with all those things. Look at Rimbaud, look at Nietzsche. Complete freedom leads to neurasthenia, to breakdown, such meteoric rise always ends in calamitous descent. A fish can leap, leap high into the air toward the sun, but it must return to the water. Chaos for any duration beyond a brief flash spirals into madness. You're either mad or fettered, your sentiments being a sign of your struggle against those fetters.

People who have experience with the kind of freedom you long for often acquire a healthy respect for boundary and measure. Learned you nothing from the tale of Icarus? Or from that of Phaeton? There are lessons to be garnered there. As I said before, the dionysian is complimented by the apollonian and there is a marked difference between freedom and chaos. Entirely denouncing all conservation and form is a sign of immaturity, proof that you fail to grasp the essentially cyclical nature of art and life. You would have the wild flowers bloom year round, you'd hold bacchanalia each and every day, through all four seasons rather than solely the spring.

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, a time to reap that which is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

I think your words are wasted on him, Darcy.

What's important to you isn't any revolution in itself. It's that you be the one to start it.

Spotlight revolutionary.









J

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi

I think your words are wasted on him, Darcy.

---

I know. But debate is often futile. Doesn't make it any less fun.

Juvenile nonsense.

Words were not artfully chosen in this piece. There is much to say for the painstaking art of classic writing, where every word has its place. Every word that was chosen was done so because it furthered a message, theme or idea.

In this piece, I see words written to get attention, but no true art in any way, shape or form.

It reminds me, however, of a story in modern art.

There was a man who was so frustrated with his wife's lack of success with her realistic art pieces that he made a creation that took him a few seconds and attempted to sell it. It was basically a few paper plates with child-like doodles of a smiley face on them.

Art sellers loved it, the public adored it, and it reached critical acclaim. He became quite famous before confessing his true intention for the piece.

I'm afraid the names are lost on me, but the point is: There is a lot of work circulating out there that is worth our time to read, and view, and then there is work that takes very little thought and energy that has no true value in it.

Just my two cents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BookBeauty

Juvenile nonsense.

---

Maybe it is. But I don't think it's much more juvenile or nonsensical than an awful lot of creative writing submitted here that doesn't attract such open criticism. I'm not sure why Wolf's effort has been singled out for this concerted opprobrium. I think that it might be because this piece irritates and exasperates people. However, if exasperated irritation is justification for such strongly-worded reaction to members' submissions, I might start contributing a few more critiques around here.

On the generous deployment of exclamation marks, by the way, I agree with Mutatis. When I get to be emperor, slaphappy exclamation marks will be punishable by the public severance of fingers.

WolfLarsen is the only creative writer on LitNet I read regularly, and that's solely because of the hilarious comments/discussions his writing spawns. To be honest, if I'm going to read, I'm not wasting my time on unpublished, anonymous writers. Don't get me wrong, there are some good poets here (I don't bother reading short stories--I learned my lesson not to after slogging my way through a few), but most seem like your run-of-the-mill angsty teen.

Maybe it is. But I don't think it's much more juvenile or nonsensical than an awful lot of creative writing submitted here that doesn't attract such open criticism. I'm not sure why Wolf's effort has been singled out for this concerted opprobrium.

I think the obvious answer is that Wolf's efforts have been accompanied by the greatest of pretensions in the form of his manifestos calling for some great literary revolution. If you go about dismissing the majority of the "classics" (or works included in the Norton Anthology) then you better be able to back it up with some alternative of real merit. Mozart, Michelangelo, and Beethoven were all openly egotistic (as were endless other artists... a strong ego being almost a prerequisite for the arts)... but they all backed up their claims. There are certainly any number of juvenile attempts at writing poetry or prose posted here every day... but seldom from individuals calling for a iconoclastic revolution and setting themselves up as some literary visionary or Messiah.