leonardcohenforum.com

Oh, give it a rest Lizzytysh. So what if some people think his reply had all the charm and originality of a Hallmark greeting card (like a lot of his recent poetry). Don't worry that you will be tainted by these horrible posts. I'm sure Leonard knows YOU are not one of the lumpen-projectionists. So quit hissy-fitting.

Moonlight ~

Your own choice of words, intended to diminish and denigrate, speaks to your own immaturity, and lack of understanding of a man immersed in his own goals and projects, who comes, owing us nothing, yet imparts a brief and elegant message to acknowledge and show his appreciation of us and our greetings.

Leonard is deluged with ongoing, widely-varied requests, to which it is impossible for him to respond. Yet, via Jarkko's thoughtfulness, our own personal words were able to reach him. Through Leonard's thoughtfulness, his gratitude for us "being there" for him, was able to reach us in return. I am fully certain that Leonard's reference to our "sweet natures" was purely a reference to the essence of our sincere postings wishing him well.

What Leonard may or may not know or deduce of me is irrelevant to the import of what I am saying, and stand by. In addition, in case you had not noticed, this is neither the section, nor the thread, for which Jarkko was providing Leonard the link. I remain struck by the audacity of these criticisms.

~ Elizabeth

Good grief! I would never have started this thread if I had known the direction it would take. I did not mean to imply any sort of criticism of Leonard, merely to have a wry chuckle at our own expense. Leonard's reply was graciousness itself, given that he has never met and probably never will meet most of us.

Lizzy, you are living in a dream world. We are not "there" for Leonard Cohen. The only "being there" we do is when we buy his latest album or book of poetry. Of course he's "grateful".

Dear Linmag ~

Yes, I knew exactly the spirit in which you initiated this thread, and how your use of Leonard's comment was a segue for what has been a great deal of conjecture over a long period of time. You have also expressed perfectly that "Leonard's reply was graciousness itself."

~ Elizabeth

Please confine yourself to speaking for yourself, Moonlight.

In what should be your obvious absence from this site, perhaps someone will notify you when Leonard's next album or book of poetry comes out, since cash purchases is what this is all about for you. Don't include Leonard, however, in your mercenary self-portrait.

~ Elizabeth

So I should absent myself from this site because I disagree with YOU about Leonard's very improbable interest in any of us. The way you are writing at the moment makes me wonder what you are auditioning for. Say! Didn't you at one time make the statement that you would like to have the job of answering Leonard's fan mail? You could reply to the birthday wishes too!

Off course his reply was gracious. However with all the nice wishes given him I expected something a bit more personal, that also could have been gracious. My opinion.

He owes me nothing, I have received much more from him in the way of music, poetry, etc. than he has from me. Unless food on your table counts from the sale of records, books, etc. Take that lightly please.
I am still deciding on who received the gift horse however.

Jarkko deserves a big debt of thanks for providing all this for Leonard and for us.

Will I?
Won't I?


Ready . . .

Aim . . .

Duck!!1!


It's not clear what colour the sky in the whiners' world is; but, the fact LC posted a response at all is astonishing and worthy of nothing short of shock and awe. Aw, give the guy a break -- erp, looks like you already have done so. Yep. I clearly hear the sound of one heart breaking.

The ingrates, IMO, seem to have their heads stuck so far up their arses they could easily brush with Preparation-H.

Condolences. You are no longer beneath my contempt.

Undeniably, Judith Fitzgerald
--
JUDITH FITZGERALD'S CYBERSITE:
http://www.onlink.net/judithfitzgerald/index.htm

Moonlight ~

That makes two misreadings, for which you can credit yourself. "What should be your obvious absence" is totally unrelated to me and whether you agree/disagree with me or not, but is predicated upon what one would hope for here ~ consistency. Since where I'm living is "a dream world" and the only "being there" that "we" [whomever you think you're speaking for] do is when "we" buy his latest album or book of poetry, for which he is then "grateful" [you are peonic and appalling with that germ of sarcasm], then the only place you need to show up, so as to be true to yourself, is the record store or Border's. Maybe the "we"s that you speak for will meet you there, so you can spend your happy cash in unison.

As a matter of fact, I was not the one who made that comment, but rather someone else who suggested it, without any input or consult from me prior to doing so.

~ Elizabeth

Dear Judith ~

Precise and eloquent with truth. You are, unfortunately, so right.

Ingrates and Cretans were two words begging me to be said, since I first read these responses late this afternoon. You have made better use of the one than I could have.

Thank you for expressing my feelings, as well.

I love your dog, going nova with his inexpressibility ~ a most fitting birthday gift for our dear Leonard.

~ Elizabeth

What was the name Leonard used? Sweet was it? There is a lot of name calling going on. Heads stuck where? This is taking some nasty turns isn't it?

Lizzytysh, if you could get out of the fog of emotion that you are weltering in you would be able to understand the point of my post. You have gone back to your old habit of blowing everything out of proportion. You and JF can get together and discuss in hushed tones the cosmic ramifications of "our dear" Leonard's birthday reply if you want. The rest of us will be content merely to buy his next album. Gee, I wonder which Leo would prefer?

There's nothing out of proportion here, other than your [and some others'] insensitivity, lack of respect, and sheer rudeness. However, as much as you might like, I won't continue to dwell on you, with further postings.

Interesting that someone of so few postings would presume to know so much about me. You are correct in one thing. This has caused an emotional response in me, beginning with rightful outrage. However, in a fog I am not.

Does it break my heart to see this kind of treatment? Yes. I dare say Leonard would gladly prefer seeing respect given, where respect is due, even apart from his being its recipient. Respect, unlike a cd or book, is not for sale.

As you allude to what Leonard would prefer, and presumptuously speak of what you and the collective "we" will be content to do, it's midday-sun-glaringly obvious that you just don't "get it" when it comes to what Leonard's words and meanings [or a number of others' postings] are all about.

I won't indulge you anymore in this, M [the moniker you're using has positive connotations not befitting what you represent of yourself here].

You shouldn't presume to refer to Leonard as Leo. From what I understand, that nickname is reserved for friends. You nowhere-near fall within that category.

~ Elizabeth

Spare your concessions, as well as your recantings and submissions, Suzanne. No one is talking about Leonard as a G~d. Your hyperbole bespeaks a patronizing attitude of condescension. We're talking about warranted respect for Leonard as a human being [and an extremely busy man], who took the time and thoughtfulness to speak out a "thank you" that had to, by necessity, cover a divergent number of people, whom he's never met, yet for whom he cared enough to respond at all. It's a concept not that difficult to grasp, Suzanne.

You and others should presume to quantify and judge the rightness, the wrongness, of a thank you?

"Did my singing [speaking] please you? No, the words you sang [spoke] were wrong."

The arrogance and the baseness here even push each other aside for space. Truly unbelievable.

~ Elizabeth