Sinister: the trouble with conversation

[carle groome]

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 at missprint.org. To unsubscribe
     send "unsubscribe sinister" or "unsubscribe sinister-digest" to
     majordomo at 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                 +-+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+