Henry Rollins

A note for / of Henry Rollins,

From the Punk 101 dinosaurs:

It dawned on me this morning for some odd reason that Henry Rollins is perhaps one of the biggest conmen that ever accidentally walked into the world of punk rock. I don’t know what the hell made me think of it or him but it occurred to me rather randomly as I was lying in my bed thinking about some old punk songs I used to adore, and then it also suddenly occurred to me just why Henry Rollins is the jerk he is.

You see I believe I found the answer and it’s actually pretty simple: Henry Rollins has a disease folks- and it’s something that I personally refer to as “pre established band syndrome“. When one really thinks about it, it all of a sudden becomes pretty obvious how it all works. Quite frankly I’m surprised I never realized it before. But now that I have I’m almost beginning to wonder if Henry Rollins, as loud and influential as he has been, is perhaps even a big part of the reason that punk rock went down the tubes like it did. This guy is as pretentious as they come and has been for years, and in my opinion it’s all on account of the fact that he has this “syndrome”. 

See, many folks might not realize; but  when you’re starting a rock band, which ive tried to do (and yes, failed at, many times) there are basically 2 paths you have at your disposal to break into it all (unless you’re rich) and basically they work like this: You either gradually build a band from the ground up, piece by piece, and brick by brick….which is what almost all the truly classic bands did ….or you get lucky and you insert yourself into an already established band that is already gigging or very close to getting there. Now most of the time when someone joins a pre established band they aren’t a singer, and in fact the truth is that you almost NEVER hear of a singer joining a pre made band because it’s just like…I mean THATS the whole personality of a band so it’s just not typically what happens.

 That one detail of course was what really had me coming to the realization about Rollins, however, because it suddenly dawned on me that this dude actually walked into Black Flag when the band was not only already organized & rehearsing – but also actually already on the road, releasing albums, and touring! Yea the band wasn’t ultra famous playing arenas and selling millions of records  like Springsteen but they were something to write home about in that punk rock world at that point in the 80s ….and then here comes this dude, who I don’t even think was 20 years old at the time, and he just slips right into the band like nothing, as the singer of all things.

 Well when I look at it now I gotta say you know …it’s pretty easy to see, from this perspective, why Henry Rollins wound up becoming such a colossal prick. He literally walked right into the zone. Threw a lucky Hail Mary Fortune 500 pass the second he walked into the scene. Sure – from any other cultural perspective this would be “awesome”; but from the very unique cultural perspective that is punk rock, I can’t help but feel this is ironically a bit of a failure. There is something condescending about it. It’s like he cheated or something. He didn’t have to watch a piece of him die in order to reach the throne like so many of the other punk gods and goddesses did. And in my opinion it helps to explain why he seems so pretentious these days now that he’s a so called “elder”. 

The funny thing about Rollins of course is that he basically seemed like a jerk  to me right from the get go, and I can remember not liking him almost the second I came to understand the personality he had  taken on after departing from Black Flag. Like all the other angry young (and very poor) punks, I liked Black Flag well enough on basically every record that I had to hear of them …but I remember very well finding out about who Henry Rollins had actually become in my own time, following the release of those records , and being utterly bewildered and even rather disappointed . Perhaps even deeply so. It was like even then as a kid I felt stabbed in the back by this guy, and as a kid that really mattered because I took all of this punk stuff real seriously for awhile back then. And I remember Henry didn’t make me feel good. Again it was like he was condescending. He wasn’t like the other big punks. Not at all. He seemed like an actor. 

The strange thing about this is that all the kids who loved Rollins and fought in his name right down the line and even went on to support that absolutely ridiculous “comedy show” bit he was doing for awhile there- they were all, not surprisingly , of the college and/or deep suburban punk variety. The truth is  I never talked to a dirty city punk in my life who didn’t have at least a slight suspicion when it came to Rollins, because the guy, again, he just became a bit of a DOUCHE!
I can even remember one night many many moons ago when he was on that insufferable comedy circuit that one of my buddies- a “deep suburban punk” – had called me up asking if I wanted to go. It was all the way out in Boston, which is a fair number of hours from me, and I figured it would be good times. I wasn’t thinking.  Then too , hearing the name Rollins at that point in time, I immediately associated the show with punk rock and thus…cheap seats. All thepunk  shows I ever went to as a kid –and I went to a damn lot of them, I only ever walked in with 15 bucks or 20 bucks TOPS and never was there an issue. Hell I sometimes would show up with nothing and kind older punks would get me in the back door for a good time. Punk rock was one of the greatest experiences of my young life because it actually let me have fun at concerts even though I didn’t have shit in my pocket on  9 out of 10  occasions. 

Well long story short I took the whole 5 hour ride to Boston this night never imagining in a million years that a fuvking comedy show (not even a punk show!! No instruments!! Nothing!!) would cost more than whatever I had on me. Well, well, well, moral of the story is don’t trust Henry Rollins who now performs for the college and suburban punks with dollars and not the poverty punks with nickels. Hell he performs for the suit and tie punks now !! On Howard Stern and all of that. With that late show he had and everything. It’s just weird. He brought punk rock to somewhere it didn’t belong. 

Yes indeed that night in Boston outside of Henrys egomaniacal comedy special, I and the other kid my rich boy had taken up were both left humiliated when we got to the door and we came to find out that the tickets were $55 maybe even $60. We were about to faint. We were standing at the door going are you kidding me I got 20 bucks and 5 of it is for beer what the hell is going on right now??? 60 bucks! to hear a musician tell jokes!?!? 

My deep suburban college punk pal went straight on in of course,the only one with enough dough (he later went to graduate school somewheres & vanished) while I and this other punk I hardly knew were left to walk the streets of Boston until fucking midnight or maybe even 1 am talking to bums and throwing shit at the wall bored to tears waiting for Henrys ego parade show to finish, not even a bottle of booze to show for our troubles. It was awful.

I’ll never forget it of course and as you can see I blame Henry Rollins for giving me a bad time that night. But again like I said, I truthfully had a bad taste in my mouth about him even in the beginning when i was 12 years old. I remember I was talking shit about him the whole car ride up that time to Boston. I never liked him. He just smelled like a fake punk to me.. 
Of course as the years have gone by now and I have occasionally found news about him somewhere it has consistently been bad news, which is why I said earlier that it’s very possible that Henry Rollins might of actually had a bigger role to play when it comes to the ending of punk rock as a cultural movement for poor angry folks  than we even yet realize. History is a double edged sword …you never know what you’re going to find and stories wind up looking a lot different in retrospect than they did at the time, and many years have passed now since Henry was in his prime….

I don’t really want to say that I think Henry is a bad guy or anything however and in fact – again- if I was looking at him from any other cultural perspective, I wouldn’t even care. But from a punk rock perspective something just feels very inauthentic and wrong about him, and I think it all goes back to this pre established band syndrome thing like I’m saying. He basically just had punk rock handed to him on a silver platter as far as I’m concerned, and the effects on his individual personality seem to have been rather…questionable. I respect him for his versatility and everything as an artist, in a way its cool he does new things-  but I dunno…something is very screwed up about it all. 

Its also funny to think that he once put out a jab at Mick Jägger for still rolling onwards with the Stones “and never changing anything” ….and though Jägger is certainly no punk icon…he never claimed to be … he also BUILT THE STONES from the ground up more or less piece by piece with Brian Jones and K. Richards. It was not at all pre established. Brian Jones had been tinkering with an earlier model of the band prior to their arrival- but he had never written a single original song in his life. That all began with K. Richards and Jäggers arriving.  Which is exactly why Jägger is still out there doing HIS THING with the Stones and performing those songs that he and he alone wrote. Unlike Rollins here, who abandoned the heart of the punk rock 101 community by never writing a single worthwhile punk  song again now for years, last I heard at least….

So basically we have one of the biggest names in punk and he can’t even write a song anymore. Come on there’s no way around it: He’s an asshole! Which is why im saying..he could possibly be blamed for destroying punk rock. 

Ted Nugent and the Right Wingers

Ted Nugent is probably one of the biggest chumps, hands down, who is currently at work in the music industry. There are many reasons of course  for why Ted Nugent is a chump  and most of them revolve around the fact that Nugent has completely misinterpreted the very culture of Rock and Roll that he “claims” to be a part of.

For those who do not know, Mister Nugent has been, for a long time, not just a rock and roller – but also a very very outspoken member of the National Rifle Association and the conservative right wing. At the same time as this, he is also a rather revered figure in a number of southern rock and even just generic rock circles. I personally call Ted Nugent and his entire strain of rock and roll “the diseased strain”.

He is basically…how could I put it …. he is a sort of oxymoron, I suppose, who , as I said before, has utterly misinterpreted rock and roll, and what it was originally supposed to mean. He is not alone in this, of course – he has millions of very clueless fans behind him, almost all of them exclusively American born. Nugent is the classic example of “i want to have the cake and eat it too” . Him and others like him stole a few liberating aspects of the original rock and roll train (the long hair, the ability to wear strange outfits,t he ability to be brash and make loud music) but then he goes and tries to slam the door on all the aspects of the rock and roll train that he doesnt like. Case in point: He claims to adore JimiHendrix – an Afro American -and to have been influenced by him, and yet he typically (at least each time I have seen him presented) has nothing but awful awful things to say about all the African americans who have been born here long after Jimi lived and died . Media matters . org gives us the following tidbit about Nugent and his opinions on black americans:

Nugent has faced criticism over the past two days for a pair of columns he wrote for conservative websites WND and Rare that variously termed deceased Florida teenager Trayvon Martin as a “dope smoking, racist gangsta wannabe,” an “enraged black man-child” and a “Skittles hoodie boy.”

Basically he is another Rudy Giuliani: He claims to be in support of black Americans but deep deep down he is quite clearly of the belief that THEY – and not WE as a collective american unit – have been the cause of all “their” inner city problems. This is hogwash …hog SHIT! and it is certainly not what the great Jimi Hendrix would have believed at all. Hendrix was actually at first utterly rejected by racist white mainstream Americans  cut from the old Nugent cloth — and it was not until he went to England (where yes majority whites were living but also where they dont have the same history as we do) that he found any success as a lead singer. Had Hendrix never gone to England …he would have never become anything besides a sideman at best. The Americans did not understand him.

Brats like Ted Nugent you see – they only accepted Hendrix AFTER the Englishmen gave him their stamp of approval, and they have largely “appropriated” him and his art work ever since.  Again: they want to take certain aspects from the rock and roll book and use them , but only the aspects that make them happy. All of the other free thinking ideas they want to light on fire and burn. The Harley Davidson boys with their Durango boots ,  their leather jackets and their long straggly hair and beards — who, we can imagine, are enormous fans of Nugent – they have,from the beginning, been very problematic for the actual core of the original rock and roll message. It is not surprising that one of the most famous rock and roll fiascos involved a Hells angel stabbing someone to death at the Rolling Stones concert in Altamont way back when.

This happened in, I believe, 1969. Two years later Morrison and Hendrix and then too Joplin were dead . I have always seen this event at Altamont  as symbolic of one wave of rock ending (the good wave) and the next wave (the diseased wave) beginning.  The diseased wave brought us the motorcycle bandit version of rock and roll that Nugent and Lynyrd Skynyrd are involved with. It was heavily influenced by southern country boy “outlaw” culture. Its biggest deviation was really the way it twisted rock and roll , which had , in the 1960s, been very feminine and even rather historically informed, into something overtly masculine , crude, homophobic,  and above all, IGNORANT. The southern rockers swept in and STOLE the crown, as far as I see it.

They were, it could perhaps be said, influenced in all the wrong ways by the rock and roll movement. Characters like Neil Young famously tried to fight it but …well…if you listen to that god awful song “Sweet Home Alabama” … you will see how far THAT went! I have always blamed southern rock for being the wave that ultimately tipped over and sank the rock boat entirely, and the biggest reason why this happened is because — surprise surprise — southern rock was very difficult for people overseas to understand. Southern rock and people like Nugent – they twisted rock music not just in a masculine direction, but also in an overtly nationalistic and/or local direction. In this they are actually very similar to the current hip hop people they despise . They made it a very very big point to come out and act as representatives of certain states and towns and cities. They all insisted on representing certain little areas–areas that people overseas will not only never see, but often that won’t hear about elsewhere, either. This was a bigger problem than people seem to realize — because it makes the songs fall flat. Not many people can listen to a song like “Sweet Home Alabama” with a straight face, just like not many people can tune into a rap song that says something like “I’m reppin’ Baltimooooore my niggassss!!” and understand either. 

The second you see this sort of nationalistic stuff occurring, the song is going to get itself trapped as irrelevant for the vast majority. These movements are poisonous. Artists fall into them and get caged. Sometimes for LIFE!

Believe it or  not you see, in the 1960s version of rock and roll – the original movement that has now led to everything in a way –  this specific shouting out of cities and places was actually UNHEARD of.  Look at all of the most influential figures from the original 60s movement and you will see all of them are very removed from their original places of origin, almost to the point where they could not wait to escape said place of origin. Pride in a place of birth was next to unheard of. It was simply seen as being deranged.

Patriotism and nationalism was not at all a part of the rock movement until the southern rockers moved in on it. Bands like the Rolling Stones and the Doors and even latter day punk groups like The Misfits or the Ramones et cetera — they almost seemed like they could have just been from anywhere. This was /is why they remain such a titanic force on things like “cover tour” circuits and radio circuits across the world. 

Figures like Nugent however, they are often involved with programs like the now rather famous Youtube program Infowars , and one of the most defining aspects of this program Infowars with Alex Jones  is the fact that they hate “globalists” and “globalist movements”. Well, that is very ironic, considering the fact that the rock and roll movement which inspired Ted Nugent and the music he has made for his living was music that promoted a globalist, and not a nationalist, outlook. I absolutely cannot stress it enough: The first wave of rock was very very deeply inspired by international travel and the way that cities across the globe were becoming somewhat “connected” as a result of the commercial airports – which ,at that time, had really just popped up. The whole myth of the great touring rock star is tied in with the international airports that sprang to HUGE popularity in the early 60s, more or less. Bob Dylans overseas tour that occurred in 1966 – the famous “World Tour” — which started in Louisville and ended in Paris and London — it was actually one of the very first times that an American rock star was seen as so relevant somewhere besides here. Elvis Presley never even once performed outside of the States….

And guess where acts like Nugent generally tour these days?? Almost solely in the USA…..

Nugents strain of rock: It was a hijacking of a cultural movement. /end


Jacqueline bell 

A student of the arts enjoys a glorious trip to the Louvre AND gets the chance to see the newly discovered Jacqueline Bell 1323 painting unveiled.

It was discovered in the attic of a Norwegian thief after his death  , and is thought to have been in his possession for the past 50 years or so, after having been stolen by the Nazis for …what some have speculated were “masturbatory /homoerotic” purposes.

Jacqueline cannot be blamed for the fact that criminals and psychopaths are among the many people around the world attracted to her. She simply CANT BE BLAMED!

When she was informed of the fact that this old painting had been discovered again( we dialed her office in Milan) she was very elated to hear the news. This particular painting was done in 1323, when Jacqueline had first been discovered herself , living as a hookah specialist in southern France. She says her lover at the time , a very  phenomenally rich Frenchman named Jean Claude, commissioned the portrait to be painted by an anonymous man she only remembers being occasionally called “Boxley”. Boxley of course, like all other males, fell desperately in love with her , even at one point begging Jacqueline to be her personal “domestique”. “I used to stand in the mornings and I would do dagger tosses with him. I would make him stand against the wall with his arms raised up in a v and then I would throw my dagger at him , just missing his skin by a hair. He used to beg for me to actually hit him with the dagger- but Jacqueline Bell is a pacifist, as my fans know – at least until someone steals from her…”

Archaeologists and art historians as well as Louvre specialists were amazed to find that, on the back of the truly  massive canvas,  there was a poem that the painter “Boxley” had dedicated to Jacqueline, written in colloquial French.

elle est le plus féminin / de toutes les femmes / elle est la seule reine / la seule beauté

As is well known by her fans now, as a result of Bethany Zetas intense biography written in regards to Jacqueline as “The ultimate 16th wave feminist” , Jacqueline was unfortunately hung upon the gallows pole at the end of her life in the 14th century, because she was one of the first to have discovered a way to put an end to the Black Death , which was at that period ravaging all of Europe almost to the point where the entire continent was on the verge of collapse. Her famous advice – les garçons doivent embrasser les garçons- was viewed as seditious, and certainly sinful,  and she was imprisoned for over 300 days in a Christian tower, before ultimately being executed in a public ritual…much to the delight of the populus . After she was hung the King threw her body to the crowd and they …. (Jacqueline has asked that we not explain further) ..

It was only 7 days later, however, when Jacqueline Bell resurrected , in the far south of Spain, opening her eyes as 12 year old female named Maria Antonia. She came to life in a small dining room with a gorgeous muscular dark skinned stud kneeling in front of her, and that man became her lover, almost immediately, and she had children with him, many of whom wound up being known as some of the most beautiful human beings to have ever lived.

She remembered everything of course when she opened her eyes as that girl in Spain, but this is of course already well known and has also already been explained in Bethany Zetas phenomenal work – and best selling book! –  dedicated entirely to the BELL MYSTERY! Recently many world leaders have been struggling to get a signed copy. Vladimir Rasputin for instance, Jacqueline swears, has been calling her constantly, “Begging for the chance to paint my toes. He is an undercover fag, as are they all, and I am sure he has all of my sons photographs saved for his sexual needs’.” Jacqueline Bells son of course, Trisha Jean… it is a whole other story…..

It is all history to be told some other time.We  just hope fans will enjoy this fascinating painting  and discovery as much as we have. It might soon go on tour..Jacqueline sure was beautiful in 1323.

joyce carol Interview on the Process

Gore Vidal had a number of bad things to say about the success that Joyce Carol Oates has enjoyed/did enjoy while he was alive, and though I certainly agree with Gore on a large number of political subjects, I find it …terribly difficult to agree with him , when it comes to the work of Joyce Carol.

In this 4 minute interview, she pretty much says why, 100 percent: She understands the process and, above all, the intense importance, of “uncensored” writing. She in fact here goes as far as to say it is a style of writing that is more honest — and also very useful , when we are in a “traumatic” period of our lives. This is something Vidal , in a sense, never understood and it is certainly one part of the reason his novels have fallen flat and essentially been forgotten in this new age.  He saw writing as something that should remain classical, I believe, and he did not want to change it in too many ways. Joyce Carol Oates on the other hand, though she did not really belong herself to any counter-cultural movement, actually writes many of her texts with the complete opposite idea in mind. In fact when I opened up Blonde – which was the first book I read by her— I was shocked to find the manner in which some of the passages had been written. I had to give the book to my aunt at one point, and I told her: I think this is the first time I have ever found you inside of a book. 

Coming from the  “classical” camp, I had never realized that writing like that was even being published. This is in fact a big part of my problem: Though I have always read fairly “widely” and certainly always wrote myself (in a myriad of styles) I have also always had, in my mind, a certain idea of what gets published and what does not. This means that I have entire manuscripts and have had them for years that I think of as “utterly nonpublishable”.

Even the work of the Beats, which they often write of as having been “spontaneous prose” (and it was) I have often looked at as essentially not being too representative of what an artist these days could acually get published, because for the most part, though censorship is officially gone, there is actually now more censorship than ever before in writing -so I feel — just because of sales. Publishers are looking for very conventional books to publish now, and so the work of “spontaneity” written in the wild vein … has been mostly forgotten. Most of the people I know in daily life, who I know for a fact would only read a book by some best seller like John Grisham, King, or Brad Thor et cetera — they would look at the writings of the beats , or even Blonde, and be perplexed and bewildered . These people all seem to insist on having solely a dreadfully refined product in their hands.

I find this very pretentious, and nobody loves “high art” more than I.

This obsession with “revision” is a big problem for writers and the craft  , I believe, because , just as JCO says in this interview, it is actually a form of censorship, and not only that, but I actually think it is a form of prejudice towards the poor. How come? Because , as Joyce Carol Oates explains in this interview here, the poor just do not really have the Time to endlessly revise and edit and revise again. Their minds are spinning, their lives deeply traumatic much of the time. And by only accepting the ultra revised piece of work as the masterpiece or the thin that is acceptable to publish and print — we are, i feel, missing out on A GREAT DEAL of potential literature. Perhaps some of the greatest. We are intimidating people and making them not want to write…

This sort of prejudice however is not just limited to  literature. It is also present in literally all of the other media forms now through which modern artists speak.

One reason hip hop, for example, was so epic , in the beginning, is because it said “SCREW REVISION!” I have often tried to express to people how the entire nature of the early hip hop days , even into the late 1990’s, all revolved very heavily around a rather un-revised and “never touched twice” product. This was a direct and very mighty hook that was thrown against the bourgeois really, because even rock and roll, you see, was ultimately twisted into something where the artists were expected to take “5 years” to write just one album — almost as though they were, yes, novelists.

Rap music, particularly the freestyle culture that was for awhile relevant but has now faded out of view, was all about the MOMENT— Biggie Smalls was said to have never even written down a single verse — and this emphasis on the moment makes a great deal of sense when you think about how lacking in time these individuals were.The entire system of insults against hip hop (like saying it isnt music because of no instruments et cetera)  – insults that I myself will admit I have often pulled on hip hop – these were all actually biases against the fact that these artists imply had never had the time to study instruments intimately or get to study even the work of other artists before them. The fact that the genre has now been stolen  by the bourgeois is very ironic…….

All of this ironically relates, though, with what the old white girl Joyce Carol is saying, because in this interview she is, again, speaking to the “unconscious fast” style and then the “refined classical style”. What I like so much is that she respects both, not just one or the other. Many people seem to find this impossible…..Gore Vidal having been one of them perhaps!



Notes from the Bunker


Years ago when I was a kid there used to be this incredible site online (it’s still there) called “text files” and it contained the absolutely strangest database of files, most of which had been put together in the early 1990s and also very late 80s , when the Internet had still been – as I always say – dark and mysterious.

Now the one thing that was really awesome about the text files database was not necessarily the actual files (though they were indeed epic) but rather the manner in which they had been organized and presented to the reader. For the most part the Site looked very much like a website straight out of a film about computers. There was something almost even creepy about it – whenever you were on it you always felt like you were alone- and when you would pop open the files , they would literally just pop as ….well, text files, and nothing more!

The reader might wonder why I’m scribbling about this old site? It is because as a writer I have often felt- perhaps foolishly- that the way my writings look to me, as I am typing them, makes all the difference. For whatever reason I really seem to find that I get a completely different product depending on what word processor I am using. I am almost even obsessed with it in an unhealthy way. The whole secret with the text files database was that it actually had no layout and i guess I have kind of always found it terribly ironic that , out of all the fancy sites I visited as a kid, I actually remember this one, the most of all. I can vividly recall dreaming that one day I would make my own text files and have them uploaded a similar database. That day has come and gone of course – and yet …as my reader might have guessed, I still don’t really feel as though I ever truly made it onto a text files database because …there aren’t any databases like that anymore!

Everything online now that there is to read , besides the stuff on project Gutenberg which is arranged by .txt files if you want, is all sorts of “fancy” (just like this WordPress database I’m using now) and, just like I’m convinced my word processors alter the text for me, I’m also convinced that the way it looks once it is “published” also alters it for me. To the point where sometimes I actually have to insert a block of my text somewhere cool looking just to get motivated. Does it sound silly to the reader?? It is really true for me!!

When I was reading Naked Lunch for instance, I am convinced that one part of the reason I wound up so drawn in , was due entirely to the fact that I just so happened to read it in an ePub file , and not an actual hardcover or soft cover book. Keeping in mind the obsession the Author had for electronics later in life – and also strange words like ectoplasm that he always is writing—and then just the fact that he often used the dash and the ellipsis when writing…it almost seems like Destiny when I look back and realize that I read the book on ePub like that.

I read it in the dark too, with just the illuminated ePub screen. If you have not already guessed: I was reminded deeply of my old text file hunting days as I did it. Often when I was a boy I would sit with the computer screen in the deep dark in my old apartment and I would twist the settings on the monitor around, once night fell, so that all the text would go a sort of hazel green and the background of any page would go black instesd of white. It was basically like using MS DOS and it always felt very romantic when I would work and/or read that way as a Boy….

These days of course there are very few opportunities for that same sort of Computer fun, mostly because the websites, again, have all become individual powerhouses in a way. The other issue is that the computer (I always mourn in a way!) has become primarily a video machine in a sense, as well as a sound machine, and so twisting the monitors settings around just to suit the old text way gets a little inconvient if you only have one computer.

At the moment I will admit I do actually have 4 writing devices in case my reader is curious. Have I ever explained? I am forgetful. Well my devices are as follows : I have the iPhone for when I need to pace , walk, or of course lay down ….I have 2 laptops running very old Linux software , with no internet connections, for when I just want to write in peace , and last but not least I then have my main computer where all the files are kept. Perhaps the reader will find it absurd. I don’t know. For me it isn’t . For me it is a method really …

I look at each of the processors as a different instrument really (like music!) that is capable of bringing me a different story or article. Like I said, the way my text looks as I’m writing it …it makes all the difference. When I first started with WordPress for instance, I swore that I would never write inside the WordPress processor itself, because I knew that if I did I would wind up making each document a “talking to somebody” sort of document – or , if not that, then I would fill it with references to photographs or video links, et cetera. I’ve now done articles like that a # of times …&&& they look very strange , saved deep inside my word processor , with no images or links. I think I get scared of my old voices sometimes too you know, when I look back on them. It is almost jarring sometimes , to see what I was writing ….to see it saved. I always sort of wondered like a fool: Imagine if all my writings saved in the word processors talk to each other, or imagine if every video you’ve ever seen is forever playing somewhere? At all times? Just out there in the universe somewhere.

But back to the Internet link!

It is kind of odd– supremely odd– to look at an Internet link when there is no internet. I wonder for example if my reader has ever  seen an Internet link inside a hardcover book for instance? I have come across it a few times, and I always find something so horrifically sad about that sort of thing, I don’t know why. Books always felt so LONELY to me! Especially when you flip all the way to the back of a school text book to read the other books referenced….oh it always felt so demented to me! I swear sometimes I have opened up certain books that have felt  so alone I honestly could have wept, I get chills down my spine with them!

It is funny how alive the Internet feels I have always thought , in comparison to a book. I think that was why I always loved the Internet : I never felt at all alone upon it. It is so beautiful for that reason, I don’t care what anyone says! I always feel so connected. The feeling never goes away. Compared to books! I often wonder : Would I have loved reading if I had only ever had books?  How did the old timers do it? They must have felt so alone….

Right now I am actually seated on the floor in front of my bookcase alone and …each time I look at my book collection  these days …I always feel as though I am looking at something dead…and yet with the Internet, I never have that emotion – no matter how old a piece of writing or a site is. I never feel anything is dead here. It all feels so ALIVE. Even something like those old interviews I link to, they feel like they were just recorded yesterday — but can the reader imagine if we watched them on VHS? Oh they would feel so old! And not just because they were VHS – but just because of the process to insert them and find them …to find them , in your closet, or your local library sitting all alone… It’s so sad! Versus with the Internet …it is never alone! Every video has a thousand friends that sit next to it.

Internet sites certainly sometimes feel creepy like the old text file site , but they never feel totally dead. Real books really often look and feel utterly dead to me, or if not that, then , if they are a book that was kept nicely over the years, they seem incredibly Royal and refined almost to the point I do not want to read it!

Certainly every reader has had the experience where they read a book in a beautiful new hardcover and they notice that the entir book is different just as a result of the cover. In a way I do think there might be magic to it sometimes…. Real magick….

Personally I would not be at all surprised – this might seem a bit random now — but I would not be surprised if at the end of our lives we come to find out that everything was recorded in a book of some sort, and we will have the chance to see the spine of the  book of our lives, just sitting there, looking lonely , on a shelf …