leonardcohenforum.com

Dear Paints,

Thanks but I'm going to go it alone for right now. I've had private information that you really are Critic2. I would like to believe that that is not true. But unless you can convince me otherwise, I shall have to keep my distance.

Very sorry...but only if you're really not Critic2.

What mystifies me is why no one has attacked Paints directly (other than Critic2). Are too many of the "friends" in on the joke. I've been questioned. Achilles has been questioned. But not Paints. Why not?

Isobel- thank you for not being angry with me
same time- just if you try to read C2 critic without prejudice or what ever you have against him- don't you find, that the poem is reflecting quite vulgar thoughts in vulgar words, it lucks originality, freshness? just vulgar, because there is not much behind that, what he is saying. I also find it quite admirable that C2 even took the effort to analyze the poem.
Now you- yourself being quite rude to Laurie for no reason at all, and still blaming it on C2. Why?

Fair enough. How can I convince you?

Oh Bee,

About my supposed rudeness. Haven't you heard, I'm part of that huge MOB. The one with the mentality.

I have read Critic2 and in the beginning it was without prejudice. But anyone who reads him without prejudice will discover that if a poet brushes off his proffered criticism as unneeded or unwanted or heaven forbid! --ignores it--he will turn very, very nasty. His critique of T's poem #2 was pay-back. It wasn't admirable that he took the time. Critic2 enjoyed writing his vulgar little comments. It was no trouble at all. How long could it have taken after all. Just take each line and slice and dice. Any 1st year undergraduate could have done that kind of hatchet job in 5 minutes. (And no, thank-you-- I'm not going to join in the fun.

So, I think Critic2 is a nasty piece of work. You and others don't. So what. All this doesn't mean much in the great scheme of things. I'm just fascinated by the control he exerts over the people on this board. Wake up, people...the Emperor is naked.

Paints,

This is quandry isn't it? I will have to think about it. I would like to believe that you are who you say you are. That you are not Critic2. And you would like to believe that I am who I say I am. That is that I am not Critic2 in disquise. (I am given to understand that he is not beyond trolling himself).

But how to prove it?

bee-
i also thought she was being very rude. appreciate your mentioning you saw it this way too.

regards,
Laurie

Isobel, - would you kindly point out Critic2 misdemeanors. I'm afraid I've not followed all of the Poetry threads, just some, perhaps I've missed a lot.
But then again- as Laurie suggested- why don't you offer some critic of yours, there is no harm in this? so if C2 critiques that , than we'll know what is what. Can you do this? so we all can be in peace, if that is what needed?

This is rich. The nastiest person on here gets a free pass while those that question him are ridiculed.

I suggest to those of you who haven't done so to go back and read through his posts since he's been here. If you can determine that he isn't one nasty piece of work and has taken over this forum then all hope is lost.

And for his critiques and how we should all have a thin skin I refer you to his reply to my critique of his work.

Oh Bee,

Do as paints says and you will discover the real Critic2. Read without prejudice. When he first entered the forum as C2 he tormented everybody. Then when his "friends" wised up that Critic2 was Michael Wolkind they joined the bandwagon. Now it's just the "losers" who are tormented. Stars may fall, the earth stop rotating on its axis but rest assured there will never be peace on the Critic2 Forum. Michael will see to that.

Isobel- ok, I went back to- where C2 and paints are "talking" to each other or something like that. But still, what is a big deal there- even if C2 is playing that bit of a game posing as Paints? Even more so, if you allready know this. Why is it hurting you? I am getting really curious what is going on here? Did C2 posted a bad critique on your work? Well, every artist knows that one can not respond to that by complaining. One can always have other options- revise ones work(lots of pain and suffering)
admitt- that in every critique, don't matter how unfair, cruel etc. it was - always, always is a grain of truth to that . That way- true artist always have to welcome a cruel critique, but same time- run away as soon as possible trying to look at his work from a distance. Don't believe much what your friends say- they love you, it should not matter to you. Always listen to the "enemy"- they know your weaknesses, and that is a reason why you are hurt.
Artist/poet should never ever complain- ever. Who you are going to complain to- your mama? your teacher, your lover etc? They don't know- as much as love hurts- art hurts even more. All you got to do- get back to them with your tools, your art and skills. If that is what you want.
P.s. perhaps you owe an apology to Laurie, don't you think?

To Everybody:

Joe Way has asked for a time-out on another thread. So I am going to Time Out on this subject. It is obvious that the Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde of the forum has conquered. To those of you who have met Michael at the events: it is clear that is the reason you have such a high tolerance level for his BS on this forum. His critique of T (and many, many others before this...start with the beginning posts Bee--not just this latest round) was arrogant, and vicious and did not just consist of making snide remarks about T's "language skills." He was out to gut T. He doesn't know the meaning of constructive criticism if he has a personal animosity towards you. He delights in the cutting remark. However, if he likes you (or rather if you like him and flatter him), he will throw you a bone or two.

There are two standards of conduct on this board---one for Michael Wolkind and one for everybody else. And it's the members who allow this to happen---By the Hail-Fellow-Well-Met posts that greet Michael everytime he pulls one of his circus stunts. I'm beginning to think most of the people on this forum are afraid if they don't fall in line, Michael will turn his guns on them and they won't belong to the cozy little club anymore. Baaa. Baaa.

And please, don't start hammering me over the head about ART. I've heard enough bad theory about ART to last me a lifetime.

it's the wonder of time-differences. I had a pretty good sleep last night unaware that this was all buzzing on the forum. thanks for your contributions Isobel, but I do feel it unfortunate that you are not straight enough to apologise to Laurie for your rudeness.

a million posts ago on this thread someone suggested that I wouldn't have critiqued T's poems in that manner if they were written by a friend. I agree. Unless a friend asked me for a completely honest crit. then I would be less specific, more bland.

But T is not a friend and my crits were honest. I didn't write anything I didn't believe. The "first language" comment was not meant to be a put-down. I believed it to be a proper acknowledgement to make and sorry if I am actually wrong on that. On egoless forums crits. are often of that type and I have no problem taking it about my own poems. It's really useful to post a work and then find out the faults which we are blind to in our own efforts.

However, although T is not a friend, I have no vendetta at all against him. I don't think I have been rude to him personally at any time. I dislike the snide way he was commenting about me with a particular troll who starts endless threads just about me.

So, thanks for your analysis of me, Isobel. I am sure you are really well qualified to judge me as a person and entirely justified to discount the views of those who have actually met me. Fancy judging a person on what you have seen and heard in real life. Yours is certainly the better approach, Isobel.

I now take the advice of Joe Way.

Seeya!

linda_lakeside wrote:I didn't know you wrote songs for a musical, C2. Will you write me one? Please?

Paula: You're absolutely right in that I dont' feel I am qualified to crit. I merely made comment on something I saw and liked. Beyond that, I'm afraid, I'm pretty ineffectual.

give me the title, LL, and the song will be humming your way soon!

Time Out's Over.

How bizarre of you. This mania for apologies. There is nothing in my posts to Laurie that would require an apology. Nothing. You notice that I have not required any apology from her regarding certain incendiary comments about rampaging mobs. You certainly have become sensitive!

My judgement of you is formed by your words written here. (Many, many words under many, many names).

You're quite right though---those people who have met you and been in your company for what---how many hours all together total out of your lifetime would you say---a couple of weekends out of your life---well of course, it wouldn't have been the whole entire weekend---a few hours here and there---what would be the total number of hours --actual contact--in a convivial setting of course--hmmm? What would you say.? Let's be generous. Let us say 48-72 hours every two years. Starting when? The Year 2000? Oh, most definitely, these are the people who would form a most exacting measure of your character based on what they have seen and observed in "real life."

You should write a musical about it.