Comments on: The Dream Party: Soulful Bedfellows, Anyone?

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 22:36:43 +0000

Thanks, Cassandra. Anyway, I meant not just toxic watering holes and like-minded hangouts for hangovers, but “standards” too…. Bye, Marcelle

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 18:29:07 +0000

There are other bars. — Marcelle

By: gerald spezio

gerald spezio — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:12:43 +0000

Marcelle; a pistol-packing-Mama went to the bar-room to even up with her cheatin-no-good lover man.

When the Mama shot out the lights and blew holes in the bar-room door, grown men “jumped out” of the windows.

Nobody jumped in!

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:09:57 +0000

Yes, well…I guess there’s no question that that’s the definitive, intelligent response to the points I’m trying to make, the theme of the DParty stuff. Oh, I forgot, filled with compassion too, infused with interest in solidarity, contributing to positive change. Again, where are “other types” of responses? — Marcelle

By: gerald spezio

gerald spezio — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:54:36 +0000

All these continual references to “thrusting” and “getting the thrust” is going to make people who know their psychology think that Marcelle could be a prevert or even a crypto-prevert which is preversion to the max.

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:38:14 +0000

I have a friend who once got a free full-page ad from a major alternative publication for an event he was producing…and received no response –except for one “nutcase” reaction– to the ad’s appeal for attendance. The event was “free” for those who could not pay. Yet no response to this ad in a prestigious alternative rag. No one reading this is in a position to second-guess why. However, when something like that happens…it begs one and all to review the power of trying to appeal to the public through a particular outlet. Here at DVoice…to receive so little feedback…so little follow-through on an attempt to introduce something fresh should be quite instructive to readers. The person above who said something about Dream Party stuff detracting from the Green Party’s agenda should be instructive too. For it represents a typical take here. Specifically, a reader isn’t “getting” the thrust of what this DParty angle is all about if they’re worried about such matters. One of the main premises in the article is that traditional third parties HAVE NO FUTURE as it stands. They will be marginalized on an ongoing basis. If readers can’t get the article’s major premises…seems like they don’t have any more potential to stir things up than the publication I referred to above. The question, it appears, is what strengths lie in DVoice as it stands. Why would not more souls jump in here? Blame some on the presentation, but not all, please. Dig deeper than that. To ask for specific verbalized contributions in public the way I have is not, to my mind, elitist…but, rather, an attempt to generate dialogue above and beyond the simplistic, often irrelevant commentary herein. — Marcelle

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:08:26 +0000

Thanks VERY MUCH for this, Lloyd. I’m not sure I understand the point being made with regard to the likes of Gerald. I don’t know how I’m being off-putting, if that’s what you’re saying. Please elaborate simply for my simple mind. I do think it’s instructive that I’m not getting intelligent feedback. This is a good window of opportunity for that…one would think. I am sending out a special letter to an influential celebrity this morning…as per The Dream Party stuff. Wish me luck. PLEASE, you editors, jump in here with a word or two, if you will. Best, MC

By: Lloyd Rowsey

Lloyd Rowsey — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:28:53 +0000

Marcelle. You frustrate people and make them angry, with your writing. Failure-to-responds are a consequence of readers’ frustration; but of course, what you see and have to deal with is the disrespect and derision which are consequences of readers’ anger. In regard to anger, in your 12.13-9:39 AM post you said that you want “hands-on” comments, not just talk. Do you simply not care that Gerald Spezio may be angry precisely because he feels that giving you “hands-on” comments would make him look like a fool?

I think you would be wise to not trivialize or dismiss derisive and disrespectful reactions. You may be making the rules, and your first rule may be: only substantive, analytical responses count. But certainly you must see that the negative reactions which you have ruled “out of order” presage if not your project’s failure, at least its being in serious trouble.

At some point, Marcelle, you have to ask yourself if you are satisfied with how the project is going; correct me if I’m mistaken, but Dissident Voice must represent a milestone of free publicity for it. Sunil and Joshua and Kim and Ron, “and like-minded others,” may jump into the thread tomorrow with “some truly intelligent feedback.” (Both quotations from your 12.12-10:49 AM post.) I sincerely hope they do.

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:39:54 +0000

Again, it would be good if people tried to “do” something about what they perceive is…awful. Something hands-on, not just talk…not just baiting. In a realm where silly puns don’t matter. Where the fun of verbal play takes a backseat to being immersed in their own humanity with others. — Blessings, Marcelle

By: gerald spezio

gerald spezio — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:12:59 +0000

Clarity?
I’m for clarity at any juncture , apex, or crotch.
Clarity is good.

By: Lloyd Rowsey

Lloyd Rowsey — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:59:57 +0000

Ahhh, gs, I think I caught you. You write that “space aliens are not the cause of the ongoing Iraq and Palestinian genocide.” (I’m pretty sure I agree with you there. :>) Yet, are you not also the well-known, knee-jerk defender of Israel and the Israeli Mafia (as it were) in America? And doesn’t the very term “Palestinian Genocide” imply at least some (teeny weenie) responsibility on the part of Israel and Mafia in America?
Don’t feel like you should reply to my compound question unless you also are feeling “truly intelligent” – “like Sunil, Joshua, Kim, Ron Jacobs and like-minded others” — and you are fully prepared to convince at least two editors at Dissident Voice that your entire take on the Israel-US-relationship-and-the-Iraq-Palestinian-Genocides-issue deserves to be put up here as an article, if that is, they are agreeable with your article’s stating to DV’s readers that any “lack of clarity” on the your part is due to your having withheld some vital but secret information.
Got it?

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:56:32 +0000

For clarity, Gerald…please note that the article “clearly states” that there must be a “lack of clarity” in public forums such as these at this juncture. — Marcelle

By: gerald spezio

gerald spezio — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:00:57 +0000

Imagine some peeyar yuppies in an LA office smirking and guffawing at the responses to Marcelle’s hints.

It is enough to make you remember how grad students in English Lit would have belly laughs over the inanities in Freshman literature papers.

By: gerald spezio

gerald spezio — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:57:22 +0000

Marcelle “clearly stated” a – “lack of clarity.”

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:15:29 +0000

Again, “lack of clarity” on my part is by design for “clearly stated” reasons in the article. I think the last question above is worth commenting on. What are my reasons for “publishing” the piece? I trust that my answer will be interesting to all the people ranting about wanting to do something about Israel’s atrocities. For one, it wouldn’t hurt the cause of Palestinians for YOUR Governor of California…commanding media attention virtually without media spin daily…to speak on behalf of the “plight” of the Palestinians. That’s one “reason” behind my interest in having the article posted. To provide the suggestion of a way in which our mutual interests could be addressed in a new way. You’re jumping the gun, so to speak, if you try to figure out how YOUR Guv can get in office. That’s for private discussion as per the article. It shouldn’t be too hard to imagine the value of YOUR Guv’s press conferences AND self-directed messages to the public (unedited), however, once in office. Here’s to your creativity in dealing with this, Marcelle

By: gerald spezio

gerald spezio — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:06:53 +0000

dan elliott called Marcelle’s work “nonsense.”

He also said;

“Nothing you’d like better than to keep me hung up trying to dissect your nonsense. So it turns out that you’re doing the same thing as Mr. “Kneel”: all you can to distract people from what needs to be thought about & done about.”

I also cannot see anything worthy of comment in Marcelle’s “work.”

Her work is farcial on its face.

Space aliens are not the cause of the ongoing Iraq and Palestinian genocide.

Most importantly, what are your reasons for publishing it?

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 17:49:38 +0000

Sunil just made clear what I tried to communicate to Gerald and others…respecting his earlier response. Good. Now that Sunil’s made appearance here again…the window seems to be open for me to encourage Sunil, Joshua, Kim, Ron Jacobs and like-minded others to jump in with a constructive word or two…a personal take…on the little I’ve delineated regarding the Dream Party idea…so that I can get some truly intelligent feedback. Some stuff can be aired in public, and it would be very sweet if more people take the opportunity to take advanatage of this forum…now….before the article disappears. It’s very interesting to me –to cite just one of many such examples– that Death Penalty in Focus did not respond whatsoever to my submitting the Dream Party blah blah to them. The piece obviously is greatly concerned with their specific agenda –having listed death penalty moratorium as a priority of sorts in the article– but my attempted contact with SEVERAL members at DPIF produced a zero response. What gives? Best to all regardless, Marcelle

By: Sunil Sharma

Sunil Sharma — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 17:33:11 +0000

Gerald Spezio wrote: “Sunil, your response to dan elliott above would indicate that you openly encourage and/or endorse Marcelle’s phantasmagorical antics.”

No, not necessarily. My point is that simply saying Marcelle’s article is “total nonsense” and that the time he spent reading it was a waste without offering any specifics isn’t good form.

By: Marcelle Cendrars

Marcelle Cendrars — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 17:04:35 +0000

Open Letter to Lloyd (and All Others): I promise to reread your latest entry a couple of more times…to make sure that I understand ALL of it. For now, I am obliged to say that I want you to know how deeply appreciative I am of your show of appreciation here. I will get much mileage from it personally, I assure you. And I trust that others will too…in some way…at some juncture. Loving best in solidarity, Marcelle Cendrars

By: Lloyd Rowsey

Lloyd Rowsey — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:52:17 +0000

Well, my problem with The Dream Party is that even when you’re superficial, preachy although uninformed about history, patronizing, sycophantic, presumptuous, and a few other things, I know that after requiring me to “clarify” this problem, your response will read much better than my clarification read. In short, you’re the tar baby in Uncle Remus, and I’ll be surprised if any established “luminaries on the left” come out to bite. Still and all, you are a genius; it’s clear from your article that you are on to something; and I believe very strongly that there should be two, three, many oppositions. Bottom line, Marcelle: Keep up the good work.
- Lloyd Rowsey