Date: Sat, 2 Nov 1996 11:45:26 EST From: olympian tink? Subject: Re: F: Can Some One Please Verify the Falacy or Truth of these: In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 01 Nov 1996 18:17:36 EST." <1.5.4.16.19961101231736.2e4f9e04@sojourn.com> (hasty, and I shall probably regret it in the morn, but I thought it important to respond...) true or false? verily, verily, I say unto you...perhaps we should just wash our hands? okay, I'll give it a go... [incidentally, while lengthy, I believe the attempt to analyze the rhetorical use of verbal attack patterns may actually be salutory for the list...] tink [is this the "Authoritative Intervention" mentioned in http://acorn.grove.iup.edu/en/workdays/Millard.html or just another log on the pyre? we shall see, we shall...] :) Date: Fri, 01 Nov 1996 18:17:36 EST :) From: "~CK~" :) :) I've about has enough of this. If the majority of the people on WRITERS :) agree with Anthony Dauer on the below points speak up now, and I'll glady :) leave here and not return, if not, I'd appreciate you letting me know I am :) still welcomed as a valued member of the list. I'm not going to let please don't reduce the list to this polarization - agree with Anthony or welcome me as a valued member of the list. this is "all-or-nothing" thinking in the "over-generalization" mode, and is quite dangerous to your self and others. I have suggested before that I personally don't care which direction the group (that dratted majority, with boots dripping blood and gore?) thinks it is going, I am here to keep that light burning, that little candle of illumination about writing. If you are interested in trying to work on that way, then you are a valued member of this list. And ~CK~, you are welcomed by me. drag up a patch of sand, dust off the little insects, and let's build that castle of words, shimmering in the setting sun, against the glitter of the waves and tides. That's the important thing to me about this list. Not whether there is social acceptance or not (although it is nice when it happens), not whether great sums of money are found buried in the back yards (again, nice, if rather cliche), or any of the rest, but whether those castles have a place to rise and be seen under the moonlight. Come on out and dance, alright? :) Anthony hide behind lies anymore. Some, maybe most of you may find it :) unethical of me to post words that Anthony has sent me privetly, butl this :) is the only way I can see to deal with a person such as him. And the :) comments he makes have to do with how I interact on this list, so I feel it :) is relevent to find out if the rest of the list shares Anthony's opinions. :) If so, than I am detrimental to the progress of the list and as I said will :) leave. I am asking this on the list, because I do respect the privacy of :) everyone who has sent me suportive private posts in the past couple of days, :) and I will not post them to the list. one small squeak--I don't believe "the list" as such (something distinguished from the individuals) progresses, regresses, or does much of anything. :) :) Christina :) okay, pop quiz time? :) :) > Get a fucking clue will ya. Yeah, I've :) >heard how much sympathy you have been receiving ... nil and I'm sure it's :) >pissing you the hell off. I also noticed your little mouse posting about :) >leaving the list received "NO" responses ... people are tired of you :) >Christina the only support your receiving is the voices in your head this is neither true nor false. it is simple verbal violence. some of the hidden (and no so hidden) implications are: - you don't have a clue (and you will accept crude language from me, which is a method of asserting control or power) - you are dependent on others, and they aren't talking to you, and you are lying. - you are hallucinating the tone of the paragraph is the rhetorical battering, "I" attacking "you" with repeated assertions. the basic statement is: I know you have not gotten support. but the insidious attack is: people don't like you Neither of these statements are anything that Anthony could know, so I would say (if forced to) that the paragraph as a whole lies on the false end of the scale. (See Dr. Elgin's series on The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense for more details on why this is an attack.) :) >Anybody with half a brain can assult [sic] your writing skill Christina ... :) >some back woods community college is no literary haven regardless of your :) >proclamations ... you forget, I grew up there. I know better. again, there is no true or false here. hidden assumptions or attacks: - you don't have half a brain - your writing skill deserves assault (note the violence in that word -- not critique, not anything gentler, but ASSAULT!) - "back woods community college" -- this is precious! not just a direct attack, but striking at your pride in your school, with the strange implied expertise that since someone was once in that area, they are aware of the current conditions down to the specifics of a workshop? - again, that grinding "YOU LIE" motif... - cute, reducing your work to "proclamations" as with the previous point, there is no real truth or falseness here, merely assertions and verbal attacks. and again, if forced, I would say that Anthony isn't capable of providing the expert judgment of the quality of the college or the experience you are getting there, although he asserts such expertise quite strongly. So, this too falls into the false pile. :) > What's the point in critiquing your work Christina? If someone :) >doesn't say it's great or the best thing since sliced bread you chew them a :) >new asshole. true or false? "What's the point..." is a question, with a hidden subtext of "your work isn't valuable." It is also a flourish, drawing you away from the sword into trying to answer this rhetorical query...very nasty! "If someone...", "you..." is such a fine example of a verbal attack pattern. Implication - people don't say your work is great or the best thing since sliced bread. Which implies - people don't like your work! (buried two levels down, at least, which makes it eminently deniable...) "you..." repeats the now familiar motif of "you will accept crude language from me" asserting power and control. It also layers in the "reverse" attack -- you attack others, you nasty person -- which leaves you questioning yourself, wondering if you are really so blind. In sum--a fine counterattack which attempts to assert that you can't ask me to do anything, because (hidden subtext) YOU ARE WRONG! false end of the scale, even ignoring the aggression and violence which make up most of the message. :) >The only one who :) >loves to go for the kill is you ... if I was out to ruin you, I stoop to :) >your level critique your work. Assertion, followed by another "if...","I would..." verbal attack. Implication: I am not out to ruin you (I am your friend!) Implication: your work (or maybe your critiques--a bit of ambiguity there) are at a low level (that "stoop") Implication: your level is different than mine (and you can't imagine how good mine is?) Remove the verbal attack, and this probably collapses into another assertion that "I don't have to do what you ask, because...YOU ARE WRONG." false. if there is anything there after we take the venom out of these lines... :) >Then we're twins Christina and if you had a grasp on reality you'd know :) >that your rep is jus as bad as mine ... well, mine isn't actually as bad as :) >yours because everyone knows that you start it ... my only fault is in not :) >ignoring you and responding. "if you had a grasp...", "you'd ..." Implication: you don't have a grasp on reality Implication: you have a bad reputation "everyone knows..." I think Heinlein pointed out that this type of statement ordinarily is an assertion completely without basis, probably false, but dressed up with a claim to ineffable truth through the so silent majority... BTW--there is a lurking "distancing" of you from everyone in that assertion. very nicely done - "everyone knows" this, so you aren't part of the group, you are separated, you are outcast... "my only ..." Implication: I am blameless Implication: you should be ignored I'd judge this one false, simply due to the attempt to claim "everyone knows." There are roughly 5.6 billion people in the world--I doubt that there is anything that they all know. Even cutting "everyone" down to our band of buddies here on the list...I certainly don't know this, and that means everyone doesn't, since a single counterexample is sufficient to break the "everyone" claim. Well, at this point, we've got a lot of venom, fear, and so forth, but all that's left after we pull those out is false, if we are using that scale. :) ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* :) CK Tower:vixxen@sojourn.com. :) Logomachy Alliance :) Editor: Washington Square Review :) President LCC Creative Writing Club :) The Jasmine Room: :) http://202.217.215.6/Users/Antonello/ or: :) http://202.217.215.6/Users/Antonello/G7.html :) "I recommend sticking a foot in your mouth at anytime...feel free... :) swallow it down...what a jagged little pill, it feels so good :) swimmin' in your stomach..." -Alanis Morissette :) ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* At last! TRUE! and thank you for giving me a chance to practice analyzing VAPs again. you might want to take a look at either BOOK SUMMARY: Genderspeak (1) http://web.mit.edu/mbarker/www/writers/t019175.txt or The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense: An Overview http://web.mit.edu/mbarker/www/writers/t021271.txt check your local library for Dr. Suzette Haden Elgin... tink