don't ask, don't tell funny about that, how it applies to almost everything in interpersonal communication. to speak, you offer an opinion. to answer, you should respond. with the first, you can go anywhere, be anything. but the second... ah! there's the rub. you have to have heard the question or remark in the first place. and what did you hear? the text? the subtext (not to mention tone, word choice, punctuations)? body language? subtle reference to environment? a misquote? it's like that title, "what we talk about when we talk about love" by raymond carver. this is why we like literature and canned music: this is something we can work on until we get it right; and this goes for authors as well as interpreters. (BTW as content, re: many moons ago arg. of struan vs. taping of one-off gig at uni--he just wants to get it proper, sorted. can't argue with that logic. tho' "sympathy for the devil"?--i'd like to hear that even if it were dubbed onto a mono minicassette with a condenser mike) same way as rewriting: there's something there--buried in the mucking blurt--it just takes time to figure it out. and conversation doesn't like time. it likes stage time, as in: how long can you pause before somebody coughs, opens a candy wrapper, takes a cell phone call? when does it become drama and when does it become real-life confusion, ambivalence, true indecision? situational ethics disturbs me. but this disturbs me more: when is honesty the best policy, and when is it pure selfishness? when someone gets hurt, or perceives hurt? and how can anyone say: that's not what i meant, not what i meant at all? ask t.s. eliot... and the REM song: "you can't get there from here" but when you have arrived at someplace you never thought you were going, how do you get back without covering the same old tired, painful ground? and making it worse? i know. ambiguous beyond belief. and not much fun. well, as said above, rewriting is the key to making it right, not in the 15 minute rule. so enough of critical doubts. ---------------------------------------------------- long time since last post and, as of this particular point, i have been reading for three days solid and still have 268 to catch up on. the last two months are so packed with material it takes me hours just to get through a dozen. so don't expect more drivel from me for a while. and yes, ribena is a most refreshing beverage. but i get a very close kick from welch's grape juice as well. and it's nearly of the same color in tooth stain. ----------------------------------------------------- i have succeeded in interesting an old girlfriend in this cult of ours and promised her a 80-minute CD comp-burn. if honey, or any of you other sweet fiends, recalls post/s regarding this config of tunes and sequence, i'd appreciate the url-cum-link as i'm such a lazy sod/busy mo-fo i don't feel like doing the work/haven't got a second to do so m'self. be seeing you in my "in-box"... +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ +---+ Brought to you by the Sinister mailing list +---+ To send to the list mail sinister@missprint.org. To unsubscribe send "unsubscribe sinister" or "unsubscribe sinister-digest" to majordomo@missprint.org. WWW: http://www.missprint.org/sinister +-+ "sinsietr is a bit freaky" - stuart david, looper +-+ +-+ "legion of bedroom saddo devotees" "peculiarly deranged fanbase" +-+ +-+ "pasty-faced vegan geeks... and we LOST!" - NME April 2000 +-+ +-+ "frighteningly named Sinister List organisation" - NME May 2000 +-+ +-+ Nee, nee mun pish, chan pai dee kwa +-+ +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+