When you read are you more captivated by a style or a story. Or will you accept nothing but the best of both? When you write are you more concerned with the flow of the information or the feel of the words? Or - whatever thoughts you have on this topic - I'd love to discuss this one.

Catherine

-- Catherine (catherine@cmjcom.com), November 14, 1999

Answers

I accept nothing but the best of both. This was not true when I was a young man. Back then I read both crap and delicacy. Nowadays I realize that I haven't time left for the crap. I love words, too. I even love the word 'crap,' but only when it's well put with the rest.

Like you, Catherine, I love my web site, although lately I've come to understand that it is not an online journal. I do not post every day, just because I am concerned with both the flow of words and the significance of story. I write for a while, and if the music refuses to play itself, or the story will not make itself apparent, then I quit and try again another day.

Yes, the Internet is a fantastic place for experiment, but I think Mr. Sturgeon might have upped his famed percentage had he lived long enough to suffer the abundance of misspelled and wobbly Internet crap. It's all a treasure hunt without a map.

I am one person, one voice. This is m

Hi Anthony ... Catherine here ...

Although I agree with you that the net contains a great deal of work which is unpolished I celebrate it, in some ways, moreso because of that. It appeals to me that such a expansive medium is available to everyone. I always figure I can go anywhere - or not - as things appeal (or don't) to me and my sensibilities.

I admit to thinking my taste is good. I have such an ego about some things. And I try hard - although not always successfully - to not let my sensibilities lead me into snobbery.

I remember my first web page. It was so awful that ... well, it truly horrendous. Blech.

So I figure that some people have improvement in them and that makes the whole thing worthwhile, I think. So, yes - there is a lot of not very good stuff out there but without the milk, one gets no cream.

In reading, I like to be carried away. I like writing like yours, for instance, because it is very dramatic - and not in a forced feeling way. I don't ever get the sense that you are creating drama - although I do sometimes think you are supressing drama. Odd, eh? I get the sense that *you* are dramatic - and so your writing strikes me that way. I loved Hemmingway for the same reason. When people say he is not dramatic I laugh like silly. Minimalism, indeed.

I like to feel, somewhere on my body or in my mind, a reaction to the words. I like them to appeal to my musical sense - they should "sound" ryhthmic in my mind and yet not pander to form and lose function. Heyoka is another who is very dramatic and while she employs some themes (no capitalization) that I sometimes have a hard with her work is so well worth the read that I go faithfully. Slavishly, even. :) And I admire her ability to draw me into her moment. S0, there are always exceptions. My work breaks every grammar and usage rule around. It's an English teacher's worst nightmare, I imagine. I don't really know any of rules. Conjugaitons and apostrophes, possessive and pluralization - who knows? I make it up as I go.

And I should dislike it, I think, if people judged the value of what I have to say based upon my adherence to a set of rules which I actually can't understand.

You are a story teller, I think. I love your stories - the captured moments of your life. I appreciate all the passions of the moment you record. I think you have a great story in you about a boy that learned to love all the absurdity of humanity.

Or about an immigrant coffee bean vendor.

Or something.

If you had to characterize the story in you - what would you call it?

I babbled.

It's Sunday, what can I say?

C.

-- Anthony V. Toscano (atoscano@mindspring.com), November 14, 1999.

>If you had to characterize the story in you - what would you call it?

'Innocence Obliterated'

And yes, Catherine, I appreciate what you have to say about the wild experiment of writing on the Internet, but I did not mean to speak of rules for their own sake (and if, as you claim, you are unsure of the rules of grammar, then you are a natural). Certain rules are a matter of common courtesy and dignity. If I claim that I am a writer -- I do not, but so many scribblers on the net name themselves so -- then for sake of dignity I check the details before I post a story, details such as spelling, noun-verb agreement and the like. I am irked by the arrogance of people who claim the lofty title, 'writer,' and then show such little respect for the tools the job requires that they cannot be bothered to use a dictionary or a spell checker. I love language. A mistake is just that, and I make a lot of them. Blithe indifference is another matter.

And yes, I judge the efforts of people who claim to be writers, just as I judge the efforts of people who claim to be physicians, lawyers artists and musicians.

Have you noticed how many people nowadays claim to be writers just because they can afford over-priced blank books from Barnes & Noble, email software and an Internet account? I should buy myself a scalpel and begin to practi

Hey Anthony ... Catherine here, again ...

I presume the cut off portion to read "medicine" - I guess we have a limit on words... which is sort of funny considering the topic.

I think I appreciate your position - I have a sense of the term "writer" as having a certain value. I also feel protective of it. And wish people would not disrespect it by not bothering with at least a sound structure - eg: spelling, punctuation, flow. Even if your style is avante garde - I would expect some care to be put into its overall presentation. You are not a poet, a poetic writer or a writer at all *just* because you don't use capitals.

I do think of myself as a writer. It is the only constant identity I have - that I have had since I can remember knowing anything at all. And I think of you as a writer in the same way I think of me as a writer. It feels to me as if you have always known you were one. I do not know if I am a good one. But I am one.

Innocence Obliterated? I do not believe it.

Mine would be Innocence Redux, perhaps. I always thought I had none left, too. Oi! The stuff I've discovered I don't know. Heh.

Catherine

-- Anthony V. Toscano (atoscano@mindspring.com), November 14, 1999.

So the piece on National Identity, I'm not so sure. But every one in a while, something pleases me. Yesterday's entry started off quiet. I was moved to take a picture of the wall in front of my sewing machine, with its various photographs and memorabilia. Then I realized I'd scanned most of those items and large size versions were up on the web, so I gave links to those. Early in the day, the title was "Facing The Wall".

Off to surfing, I saw Rick McGinnis' (sp?) collection of his father's letters while he was in the military. The scan of his writing impressed me. Was one tear-stained? I could almost touch it.

What if I find samples of MY parents'writings?, a little voice asked? I left the computer idle, and went digging. I only turned up two samples, but I scanned them, and put them with the respective person's portrait.

A vague satisfaction lasted for a bit. It was mostly a visual entry. Then it occurred to me I could do something with the TEXT to make it all hold together as a unit.

What I like about it is how it evolved through out the day.

Real writing often involves such an evolution, unseen perhaps to the reader, but known to the writer.

-- Joan Lansberry (gallae@casagrande.com), November 21, 1999.