Wednesday, September 07, 2005
oh I do read Jim Behrle's blog. I had his link up, but I found I didn't like to read his blog daily. my links represent the daily grind, I regularly read and enjoy lots of other blogs. only a handful of intrepids read my typing daily. Jim's cartoons, for me, go zzz zzz zzz WOW!!! zzz zzz zzz WOW!!! over production, that is, is okay but I don't have to read it all. throw it in the moat and see if anyone salutes, that's okay. I accept that nature of blogs, that it is transitory stuff, a lot, and doesn't have to be CV material. he's very funny, he's a dickhead, he's all the normal variations. so am I. he didn't have to invite me (and Henry Gould) to read last year, but did. I don't want to root, or what's the opposite of root. I mean, where's the real moral stance? same with Kent Johnson. really. why take sides? when did the sides appear? I went Jimside just now, saw my name on his list of whatever, sexiest (I typed sexist, initially) blogger? I didn't look at the result (zero, okay), that's asking too much of the concept, frail as it is. in Bloggy World, there's a currency in name. spelled wrong even. I'm particpating, I know. link me for whatever, even. it was funny to see me in the list, as if I were a current in the general swirl. I assume nothing. maybe I am. I'm not above the sensation of audience. I feel like a failure admitting that, but I also feel like it's a strength to do so. honest at least. I'm not controlled by that tingle, but do note the tingle's existence. as much as I love writing, I own an ambivalance about the processes involved. the push forward, outward, toward. maybe I shouldn't mench, but David Kirschenbaum backchannelled me, responding to a post I wrote concerning himself. I felt a little icky about his writing (or more, posting them to his blog) poems to his ill mother. I haven't 'attacked' too many people here, the positive excitements are more interesting to me, but David did get poked. not that I bludgeoned. David's response wasn't defensive, he simply described his motives. at the time, I was dealing with my father's decline. my commentary was as much pointed at myself as to David. the idea of using this 'material'. and if you noticed, I did write of my father's decline and death, so how critical can I be. I sort of had a point when I began this but I am definitely awesomely tired and what the hell. I'm not -iest anything,so that is all but gone. but the idea of integrity is not lost on me, however much I fail the test. and so on, tiem for bed.