Friday, October 16th, 2009

Other Voices, Other Wombs

So there was a thing that happened in this corner of the Internet over the last week or so and people said some stuff and then some other people said some stuff back and then a lot of people said a lot of things about it and there were letters exchanged and the like? You know what I'm talking about. Anyway, here are a few additional responses.

26 Comments / Post A Comment

Tuna Surprise (#573)

NEW COLUMN SUGGESTION: Letters to the Editors of n+1, with Edith Zimmerman

atipofthehat (#797)


sox (#652)


Baboleen (#1,430)

Edith Zimmerman may turn out to be a very busy woman!

Tuna Surprise (#573)

Um, did you read the letter to the editor that started a paragraph with this gem?

And that brings me to another niggling concern the
piece awoke in me.

Edith's new column practically writes itself.

ProfessorBen (#1,254)

I agree with this idea, but don't make fun of awl poster/commenter Matthew G; ProfBen has an increasing literary/gardenary crush on him! Instead, this first letter's opening…"When you and I read Kierkegaard's Either/Or this spring, in a group that met every morning for a week in the second-floor cafeteria of the Houston Street Whole Foods, we had many arguments about the nature of marriage." WHAT????

jolie (#16)

You know who deserves to be heckled? Yeah…

Tulletilsynet (#333)

All together now!
(To the tune of "Oh do you remember sweet Betsy from Pike?):

When you and I read Kierkegaard's Either/Or
This spring in a group that met ev'ry morning
F'r a week in the second-floor cafeteria
Of the Houston Street Whole Foods we had many arg."

Tulletilsynet (#333)

In a perfect world, every paragraph would be followed by Edith Zimmerman's version of it, in italics.

Abe Sauer (#148)

N+1 slash fiction. Someone get on this.

There are ads for Uggs all over my page. I'm glad you're earning the bourbon and the cat medicine but it's killing my commenting libido.

lululemming (#409)

"The second lemma…"?? Jesus H. Christ.

ProfessorBen (#1,254)

lululemma to you?

The tone of that was quite stagey or excessively self-conscious or something.

Ha! auto-didactic, that's what I was thinking.

Tulletilsynet (#333)

Hey formerly, did you notice that all the N-Plus-One-anists cite themselves?

atipofthehat (#797)

Mr. Galloway, I can't wait to read what I hope will be your many, many books.

metoometoo (#230)

Me too!

bb (#295)


Abe Sauer (#148)

Do not make me go over there again.

atipofthehat (#797)

I enjoyed Marco Roth's letter, too. Still waiting for Kunkel to weigh in.

sergeant tibbs (#1,786)

How did I know it was Matthew Gallaway before the end of the letter? Great response.

Multiphasic (#411)

Does anyone want to reject the fundamental assumptions of this being a "utopian" argument? Since it does so very little to respect individual differences, including the variable impact of sentimentality itself? As the last writer sort of gets at, it's easy to blow off sentimentality when you don't value sentimentality; it's easy to argue for "peak experience" if the sentimental doesn't create such a thing within you.

(all of this just circles back around to the oft-repeated argument that Mark Greif's utopia is primarily a utopia for Mark Greif. And so is every other utopian's, which is why I say the entire basis of the argument is pretty much bunk. I'm going to blog about this, and also the obsession with lost and failed utopias [hi Whitney Museum you old hag hack], I really am. Watch me)

I imagine Greif's utopia if realized playing out something like Squidville.

Abe Sauer (#148)

Also, I'm bummed my note wasn't included.

Tulletilsynet (#333)

Don't waste your fragrance on the desert air.

Post a Comment