THE ASSASSIN!
************************************
(Scrolling down the movie screen):
THE MOST DEPRAVED GENERATION IN AMERICAN HISTORY IS LIVING NOW, LEADING LIVES OF CONFORMITY WHICH HIDE SOULS OF DEPRAVITY. THESE CONSUMERIST GENTRY REQUIRE PUPPET ARMIES TO SUSTAIN THEIR PRIVILEGED STATUS AGAINST BOLD REBELS WHO FIGHT FOR GOOD AGAINST ESTABLISHED EVIL. . . .
************************************
Irresistible hate. The Man in the Black Hat senses this emotion as soon as the figure walks into the warehouse accompanied by the callow youth who found her. Black hat motions to hidden bodyguards. Shadowy hands grab Willie and toss him outside. A steel door closes.
The men in the room question whether she should fear being alone with them-- or should they instead fear being alone with her?! The Assassin strides forward until she stands in front of Black Hat's desk, staring down with large tilted head at him.
Her sudden presence fills the spacious room. She wears a white jumpsuit over her taut form, with pointed white leather boots, and skin-tight white gloves on her hands with dark red stains on them. He can't see behind her mask, but senses sarcastic features as her sharp blue eyes study him. She's adopted an arrogant yet casual stance, unsettling for reasons no one can fathom. How has the atmosphere in this space of control become so changed-- so charged-- in mere moments?
***********************************
The Defense Committee for Overprivileged Writers meets in a green and gray warehouse moments before the arrival of the spectral creature they've gone to great trouble to hire. The handful of discreetly-dressed men sit in a semi-circle of chairs on a concrete floor, amid deep yellow crates which stand behind a gray metal desk. As they talk in hushed tones, eyes glance warily at a waiting door. One set of eyes, behind glasses, stares at the door most intently.
"Afraid to be here?" the Man in the Black Hat mocks him.
The man in glasses clears his throat. Nerdy and unshaven, he resembles Jonathan Franzen.
"I understand the mission," he puts in.
"YOU should, Black Hat emphasizes, pointing at him.
Objectively, like mad scientists they discuss the creation of an agent; how a struggling person of ambition can be utilized as a tool if caught early enough. It's a tried-and-true technique; the philosophy behind the Blue Caps of the Bolsheviks and the S.S. of the Nazis.
A short man with black hair explains the process to his more aristocratic-looking colleagues. The Weasel, is how he's known.
"The prospects obsess over work and struggle. We use that to bind them to us; to wash from their minds all conscience to keep them on a narrow track. Always there must be an Enemy as focus. This the Rebellion readily provides. The result is the ultimate literary terrorist, programmed to destroy literary terrorists!"
The Weasel smiles with difficulty. His person appears damaged, or deformed, amid the rigid bearing of the others. He sits at an angle as if his back had been broken, peering up at the ruddy Overdog in the black hat across from him.
"The art of the matter," Black Hat talks over him, "is to program the selected agents without their knowing they've been programmed. Presumably this has been accomplished."
"Indeed!" the Weasel answers, black beady eyes glistening as they look up at the man.
Angles of yellow and gray light crisscross the scene. Black Hat rises and sits behind the steel desk which faces the warehouse door as the other men fade into shadow. . . .
**************************************
Now the glowing white spirit is before them.
"Forgive the white mask," the Assassin sneers. "But then, you wear a black one!"
She refers to the veil.
"We're not alike," Black Hat tells her with what tries to be an assertive voice, though it sounds weak next to hers. "Remember that. You're hired to do a job. You'll do what I want. The alternative for you is to be as obliterated as the person you're about to obliterate."
She doesn't reply. Her intelligence burns through the mask at him. He senses her sneer widen. He's happy she wears a mask. Never would he care to see that face.
The camera pulls back to reveal the other members of the Defense Committee. The Weasel grins. The unshaven writer looks away and his hands flutter in his lap. His chair is turned sideways, signalling halfway participation in the project. Part of him wishes not to be here. The other part is compelled to ask a question of the ghost-like character they've hired. He clears his throat.
"Do you know clearly what you're undertaking?" he asks.
The brooding eyes behind the mask turn contemptuously on him.
"I know who I contend with. There's enough talk in literary cirlces to suggest your target is the same. It's, um, rather obvious!"
The Weasel quickly responds.
"Yes, yes," he says. "Obvious to us all. But how do you propose to do it?"
A widening smile before them.
"Good sirs, take off the head and the body is dead. The movement will wither. That's the first step. He's unable to avoid contact. His ego won't allow it! He'll welcome his doom. That I know. It'll be glorious to provide it. Gladly will I destroy literary scum. I'll take down the literary pretender to save the literary art."
"You're a writer?" the Franzen-like character asks.
"You can call me that."
"Of what school? Which program did you attend? Which teachers did you have?"
"The teachers of life! But don't worry, good sir. I've amended my underground status. I've atoned for past crimes. My official learning may now exceed yours. Not to put myself in your lofty realm; I know the gap between us. As to what school I belong to, I'm a Stoic and a Cynic. I'm an Epicurean also. A hedonist, a narcissist, an exhibitionist; yet also a hermit, alone unto myself. I'm of the world and apart from it; ruined by it and repulsed by it, yet thoroughly embracing it. I'm an Imperial Roman; a corrupted product of our time."
As she finishes she bows her head. The voice from behind the mask is more vibrant, more threatening, more authoritative, more filled with meaning than any they've heard before. The men smile. Victory is guaranteed for them, they're certain.
The camera zooms in on the man behind the black veil. His lips move. The voice on the soundtrack becomes peevish.
"My friend has died . . . his funeral . . . they mocked him. They mocked me! You know how they confronted us at Columbia. You went against their leader before and must do so again. Obliterate, obliterate, obliterate, obliterate. No rebellion. NO REBELLION."
The mysterious white-clad figure in front of him bows its head, like a creation of his imagination; mad compulsive product of his id.
"Bring out the dummy," Black Hat orders.
An effigy of the ULA's former leader is wheeled out. The black-veiled literary scion looks at the Assassin, then points to the dummy.
"Kill it," he says.
The room explodes in violence. Before the onlookers can blink the effigy has been kicked, punched, stomped, decapitated; the stuffing knocked out of it; sawdust scattered about the large space. What's left of the dummy lies face first on the concrete floor, a knife protruding from its back.
"Well done," Black Hat comments.
Those behind him enthusiastically applaud. Even hesitant Franzen joins in.
"May the upcoming encounter go as well," the Franzen character tentatively adds, squeamish about the necessity of what's to come.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
The thesis of this blog, that members of the literary establishment willl stamp out every note of dissent, is a true one. It's exemplified and proven by the presence of "Harland" and his ilk.
Curious that they say not one word about the media monopolies, but instead spend time going after ONE guy running a few obscure lit-blogs. How can this be justified?
Corrupt frauds. . . .
The truth terrifies them.
Hmm. I wonder why Harland and his gang are leery of commenting on this narrative. Does it cut too close to home??
No. Because it sucks.
Commenting on it would be like making fun of a mentally disabled kid.
It's curious then why you keep reading it.
I don't think it sucks but I find it largely incomprehensible. The story itself doesn't offer much - it seems to be an allegory for events that only the author knows about.
As for your purported thesis, you weren't "stamped out." You stamped yourself out, when some guy started commenting on your blog. This doesn't say anything about media monopolies or the literary establishment. It does say something about your own thin skin.
--the wandering jew
I find it strange that I'm still being attacked by anonymous characters. What's the attraction?
*******************
Harland and Company are themselves proof of the intolerance of established writers-- those who've sold their sould to the system AS IS and block attempts to remedy it. Why else are they here, on my blogs-- when I've left the ULA, diminished my readership, and no longer offer any kind of a threat?
It's my VERY EXISTENCE which is the threat; which can't be tolerated.
********************
Thin-skinned? Really? When one considers the massive amount of time and energy spent by anonymous foes in trying to discredit the ULA campaign? (The Guskis, Graces, etc etc.)
What's the motivation?
Why are folks so resistent to even the hint of literary change?
You change the subject as deftly as McCain. It's not change that bothers people, Mr. W. It's *you.* Always has been. Don't you get that by now?
And just so you don't go getting any delusions of grandeur: you don't bother people because you're so correct; you bother people because you're a hypocritical mortally obtuse reactionary impervious to having his supremely arguable core convictions shaken even the tiniest bit.
I'm confused, Wenclas. Are you inviting comment or not? This serial you are writing is quite esoteric - taking on the entire literary world in an allegory that (I'd guess) few people can entirely follow. If I state this contrary opinion, am I "denying your existence?" Posting comments on a blog, no matter how obnoxious, is not the same thing as shooting someone down in the streets. You invite debate and then, when you receive it, accuse commenters of "intolerance." If you don't want people to chime in, you should turn off your comments again. If you want debate on literary matters, then allow me to say, this story doesn't look like the future of literature.
--the wandering jew
THE CLOAK OF ANONYMITY
The Internet is a path toward insanity. The Cloak of Anonymity allows new levels of what is in fact prank/hate mail-- malicious writings whose sole motivation is the sick satisfaction of indulging base instincts.
I've seen it on my blogs with endless comments from faceless turds; absolute nonentities who have no understanding of real dialogue, man to man; identity to identity. We always like to believe there is SOME motivation for behavior; that it wasn't, say, an Oswaldian turd as assassin, but a past enemy, or a conspiracy. This belief may not account for the true baseness of human behavior.
The character "Harland," using various identities, has expended an enormous amount of time and mental energy in attacking someone-- myself-- who has nil position and influence in literary society.
For what purpose?
What's the payoff?
There's been nothing constructive about his writings. He's not building anything. He's not promoting himself or his own writing. He's merely trying to discredit a fellow lowly writer, sacrificing himself for the cause of a literary establishment which doesn't care one whit that he's alive.
If there's no payoff, then Harland is an absolute fool-- is worse than a fool; a piece of destructive malice in the universe wasting and abusing his intelligence and his talent; a living lie destroying his soul for no cause at all.
Why do you believe you must know the identity of anyone who disagrees with you? The argument should matter; not the arguer.
Or are you someone who must know the circumstances of every author's birth, and the number in their bank account, before you decide whether their work has merit? Is it all sociology to you, and never the text?
--the wandering jew
"The Internet is a path toward insanity."
Who says Wenclas is completely lacking in self knowledge?
I want to know
1.) Who my enemies are.
2.) If I'm wasting my time.
**********
In any competition or endeavor, intelligence, including about your opponents, is a must. ESPECIALLY when so much energy is being spent-- as by you-- to derail what I'm doing.
Again: motivation?
**********
Why did I reopen comments?
Simply to tie up a few loose ends. Turning the lights on to see cockroaches scampering across the sink.
The two characters who've been posting, "E," and "P.C.," aren't worth another minute of my time.
My interest is in the efficiency of the literary rebellion, which I strongly believe in. If I'm not connecting with those I should be reaching, not converting them to our ideas, then the fault is mine, and I need to rethink and rework my strategy.
I'll have a little more to say about this in coming days.
**********
(p.s. One never stops learning about human nature. That these individuals can scorn everything about myself, my writing, and what I'm doing-- and yet never stop reading-- to a point is perplexing. Of course they represent essential dishonesty-- not least with themselves.)
Anonymous, "them who don't shine "
Eponymous, "my I had a mote in it"
Unanimous, " us when we get there"
The anonymous are the shadows cast
by the name of one who names names
from where does the light emanate
is the question an answer neither
one nor the other but all and each.
Scofflaw in tme
of need without want is
unanimous all in one.
One must always know the context in which disputes operate.
The actions of undergrounders like Frank and myself have been intended to bring a sliver of disagreement and opposing ideas into a monolithic and uttrerly conformist literary mentality.
By contrast, the demi-puppets-- truly reprehensible people-- find unease in their minds by the presence of ANY disagreement, no matter how tiny, which they then work to wipe out, presumably so they can sleep at night.
The hatred exhibited by our enemies has been to me amazing.
The extent to which these people have turned themselves into enemies of myself-- for the scantest of reasons-- has been an education.
"Harland" is one of several identitites of a cracked individual who's invested an enormous amount of time in attacking me. I hope he soon realizes that when you play with a rabid dog, it's going to eventually take off your hand.
(Or see the great novel, The Mask of Dimitrios, about the sudden intrusion of reality.)
Have a good day.
p.s. My recent investigations answered some questions but raised many more-- including about a non-Harland "double agent" who seems to have been playing both sides against themselves. Explanation?
Can someone please share the official ULA statement regarding the death of David Foster Wallace and what that does to the literature landscape?
Mr. Henrison:
Personally, I think this is well formulated question. As you know or will know presently and I want you to know even before that that I am going out on limb here but don't worry as I am not beside as this is a cartoon limb and the tree collapses while the tree's limb I am out on as the idiom goes remains stationary in mid air even if sawed through by the cartoon character out on it, the ULA is a cooperative and loose Alliance of independent DIY writers and autists, so, technic'ly, the ULA per se won't probably have or can have for that matter a collective, groupie, comment on this Literary Establishment suicide. However I have gone ahead and forwarded your proposition posed as a question to a good sampling of ULAers especially the maverick novelists and them who committ ficciones who I think will enjoy the challenge and intelligence of your query and post back here to weigh in on the passing of a comrade American writer and his affects, among them Wild Bill Black Olive, Jack Saunders, Joe Pachinko, Wred Fright, Carl Robinson, Jessica Wibur, Tom Hendriks, and Steve Kostecke.
Well, Mr. Henrison, its been a bit and not one undergrounder that I mentioned nor those I didn't mention in the last comment, wote back or responded to my query on this Blog-- of course King Wenclas may have got some response but I doubt it.
So there's your answer-- however I do know in a bulletin from the Kelly's Writes House at the University or Pennsylvania sent me a few days ago that they er what I mean the academics and their solicitious if not salicious MFA flock have been celebrating the "great contibution to postmodernism literature at least Wallace made.
And have symposia taking place, an example of which pretty much runs as follows:
What will postmodernist studies and art do now that this writer has packed it in?
My resonse is then when will Penn give up its huge taxloop wholes now that its corporation is the largest real estate holder in Philadelphia?
Remeber that this University is the same one that held out just about the longwest and therefore was one the last to support sanctions against Apatheid 'cos their trutees and trustfunders had grievous links to the South African government back in the final days of that regime?
Post a Comment