From: blake-d-request@albion.com Sent: Friday, November 08, 1996 8:20 AM To: blake-d@albion.com Subject: blake-d Digest V1996 #127 ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain blake-d Digest Volume 1996 : Issue 127 Today's Topics: Arlington Court Painting Re: Fwd: What Bart Writes on the Blackboard... Re: Fwd: Halloween Humor Re: blake quarterly Re: humor? what humor? Blesspoppet! "reply to" problems on the Blake list Re: Blesspoppet! Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? Re: "reply to" problems on the Blake list Re: "reply to" problems on the Blake list Nietzsche, Lawrence, Blake and God Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? Re: blake quarterly Selflessness vs Selfhood/ divine vs earthly reality Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? -Reply Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? -Reply God, the universe and everthing (and Mr Blake!) Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? Golgonooza Re: Fwd: Halloween Humor ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 96 14:02 EST From: "Elisa E. Beshero 814 862-8914" To: blake@albion.com Subject: Arlington Court Painting Message-Id: <9611071902.AA14634@uu6.psi.com> Chris, --If you haven't done so yet, read _Milton_ and _Jerusalem_ and check out the number of different feminine representations in these late prophecies! --Elisa - - The original note follows - - Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 17:38:26 -0500 (EST) From: Christopher Sonnemann u Sender: Christopher Sonnemann u Reply-To: Christopher Sonnemann u Subject: Arlington Court Painting To: Blake@albion.com Resent-From: blake@albion.com Hello everyone, this is my first message to this web site. My name is Chris and I am a Fine Arts student at Wilfrid Laurier University in Canada. I am writing a paper on The Arlington Court painting/Circle of life/sea of time and space/regeneration, or whatever the hell!!!!!!!! else people call it. As you can see I am rather frusrtated, since it seems there are as many interpretations as their are names. I,ve read Grant, Raine, Simmons & Warner, Digby, Singh, Damon and Freed, and though all offer interesting points I,m still not satisfied (By the way I suggest reading Charu Sheel Singh, The Chariot of Fire: A study of Blake in the light of Hindu thought if you really want a different angle on Blake!). The course I am writing this paper for is "Women Images in Art" and in my paper( someones God help me!!!), I am trying to illustrate the female role in Blake's concept of earthly/mortal/vegetative creation. One stumbling block (of many) I have encountered is the chariot rider in the water, is it Tharmas's emanation Enion (?)I suggest this because of Tharmas' relation to water. ~Other suggestions are Ahania, Eno, Leutha or one of Urizen's daughters Any suggestions? Chris ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 11:47:07 -0800 From: reillys@ix.netcom.com (susan p. reilly) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: Fwd: What Bart Writes on the Blackboard... Message-Id: <199611071947.LAA12528@dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com> Oh, Charming! Truly Elegant! Is nothing sacred? How do these kind of messages find their way onto the Blake list? Mass e-mailings? More than a few of us, I would venture to say, are interested in ALTERNATIVES to Simpson quips, Halloween "humor," and mass advertising. But alas! I knew it probably had to happen. I am disillusioned by this cyber carpet-bombing. And I am made doubly so by virtue of the unhappy fact that some of it is emanating like "Flogiston" from my graduate institution. Get this boghouse humor off the net. We are not amused. Susan Reilly ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:47:58 -0500 (EST) From: "P. Joubert" To: blake@albion.com Cc: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: Fwd: Halloween Humor Message-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 7 Nov 1996, Scott A Leonard wrote: > I, too, am troubled that someone thought the rest of us might find Bart > and the Pumpkin story funny. In most universities, it is patently > actionable to foist upon one's opposite-sex colleagues "humor" like the > Cinderella "joke" we were just exposed to. > > This list is for me and for many others a part of our professional > workspace and I don't wish this environment to be made uncomfortable for > anyone. > > Here, here! DON'T DO IT! > > Scott A. Leonard I too felt this action was inappropriat. And yet, when we concentrate so hard on dividing our "professional work space" from all our other "spaces", are we not fragmenting ourselves even more than Blake felt Christiandom had fragmented his society? This person may have (to us) very inappropriately released his/her Desire, which our rules have sought, for "professional" ethics to repress; at the same time, we could try to GRIN once in a while, even in the work place. Just a thought. Smile, Pieter Joubert ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:56:36 -0500 (EST) From: dpvintin@acpub.duke.edu (Giles David) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: blake quarterly Message-Id: <199611072056.PAA27474@argus.acpub.duke.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Dear Managing Editor: > >I accept your offer of a free trial issue of the Blake Q.. My mailing >address is: > >2185 Redwood >Republic, MO 65738-2000 ditto moi Giles David 201 Onslow Street Durham NC 27705 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:07:08 MET From: "D.W. DOERRBECKER" To: Scott A Leonard , blake@albion.com Subject: Re: humor? what humor? Message-Id: November 7th, 1996 Scott Leonard has just stated that he, too, is > [...] troubled that someone thought the rest of us might find > Bart and the Pumpkin story funny. In most universities, it > is patently actionable to foist upon one's opposite-sex > colleagues "humor" like the Cinderella "joke" we were just > exposed to. > This list is for me and for many others a part > of our professional workspace and I don't wish this > environment to be made uncomfortable for anyone. > Here, here! > DON'T DO IT! Yes, I, too, *do* agree with such scolding of the offender. In principle. Scott Leonard with his quotaion marks for "humor" and "joke" clearly is one step ahead of whoever forwarded those terribly incorrect communications. His message is not masquerading as "humor" at all. And yet, he must have read those postings in the first place in order to have his professional workspace "made uncomfortable" by them. So what the fuzz? why can't we simply delete what makes us feel "uncomfortable" -- and bad, too? Too much attention, I feel, is being paid to such "offences", and by discussing "netiquette" and political correctness in detail on this list, we may actually make it more attractive to tease our "humor" this way. All I have to say in this matter. And for the aforementioned reason I hope that no one feels the need to discuss this any further. _____ . . ' \\ . . |>> O// . . | \_\ . DW Doerrbecker . | | | . Kunstgeschichte im FB III . . . | / | . Universitaet Trier, D-54286 Trier . . . | / .| doerrbec@uni-trier.de . ..o u| --who loves to stare at pictures, but is not a sportsman at all!-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:49:43 -0500 (EST) From: dpvintin@acpub.duke.edu (Giles David) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Blesspoppet! Message-Id: <199611072049.PAA26634@argus.acpub.duke.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Ah, List Poetry. Difficult form to master well, and in the case of '$340.00 in FREE Groceries', I ache to see it stretched beyond breaking point. However, as writer and theopoet myself (albeit a clumsy one) I welcome the opportunity to listen in on the Blake list, and occasionally send in hymnody for appreciation and possible comment. If my little weirds come under the heading of 'unrelated limericks', I am happy to unsubscribe immediately. Didn't Mr Albright reflect with Mr Emerson that all true religion is outside religion? Maybe the same is partially true then, in relation to that religion called 'Blake' - a religion as much like any other, that invites its adherents to light their candles in a rich procession of illumination. The puny flame I carry is meagre, in comparison say, to the mighty torches of academe that many here carry. But aren't we all stumbling into grace? One hand to hold the flame, and the other reaching out to navigate a rich inviting dark...and all that? Incidentally, the lass at Blake Quarterly is a total blesspoppet! My outsider hymn based on "And did those feet" is even as I speak, enjoying perusal on their editorial desk with high reccomendation for possible inclusion. So I for one, encourage you all to increase their subscription, and up her salary. Giles Those who say they like poetry and don't buy any are a pack of cheap sons of bitches. Kenneth Rexroth ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 96 13:54:58 -0800 From: Seth T. Ross To: blake@albion.com Subject: "reply to" problems on the Blake list Message-Id: <9611072155.AA07140@albion.com> Content-Type: text/plain Blakeans: Um, several things have gone wrong with the list in the past couple of days. Please remember -- when you reply to a Blake message, your message goes to hundreds of people all around the world at the address "blake@albion.com". Before you send a reply, please check the "To:" field in your mailer -- if it's a personal message, then be sure to address it properly. For example, if you want to take up Patricia Neill on her kind offer to send a sample issue, don't just hit "reply" and send it to everyone at blake@albion.com. Send it to her personal address at "pnpj@db1.cc.rochester.edu". Another example: if you're upset about a spam, don't exponentially compound the problem by posting your ire to the whole list. JUST LET IT GO! If for some reason you really need to vent: SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE SPAMMER, NOT THE WHOLE LIST. Again, check the "To:" field in your mailer -- ironically, the spammer in question NEVER EVEN SAW ANY OF YOUR RESPONSES since they were addressed to the list and he's not on it. Finally, please send all administrative requests to blake-request@albion.com. This includes subscription/unsubscription requests as well as reports on list problems, including spams and other attacks. Both Mark Trevor Smith and I will see it and be able to respond accordingly. Now, let's return to our regularly-scheduled Blake programming. Onward! Seth Ross Albion Sysadmin "Now consumed by flames of fire Now consumed by iron wire ..." PS To leave Blake Online, send an email message to blake-request@albion.com with the word "unsubscribe" in the SUBJECT field, like so: TO: blake-request@albion.com SUBJECT: unsubscribe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:52:54 -0600 From: jmichael@seraph1.sewanee.edu (J. Michael) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: Blesspoppet! Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Giles-- I'm glad to hear that your hymn may soon grace the pages of the Blake Quarterly. I liked it, especially the final version you shared with us. But surely you're not placing your work, or the contributions of "non-academics," in the same category with such spams as "Free Groceries" and Bart Simpson's Proverbs of Hell? I don't think those who have rightly complained about off-topic postings mean to close the door to any discussion of Blake, but there's outside and then there's . . . outside. Since it's been suggested that we not discuss the condemned postings any further, I'd like to raise a slightly different issue. The conflict between "expert" and "novice," academic and non-academic readers of Blake, seems to surface perennially on this list. Anyone know why? I personally am delighted to meet anyone who appreciates Blake, and yet I sense that some newcomers are intimidated or offended by the "weight of scholarship" here (which, incidentally, is light compared to some other lists in terms of bibliographies posted, etc.). Jennifer MIchael ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:26:14 -0600 From: jmichael@seraph1.sewanee.edu (J. Michael) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Randall wrote, in response to Pam: >Now one key here that I see in your words is this need to "annihilate" >selfhood. And it's just NOT going to happen. It's not REAL. Blake's >cynicism toward Rousseau's naivete, for example, can perhaps be felt as >early as poems like "The Lamb", when you wonder: "IS it the Savior that >he's designating? Or is it a person, placing a significance on a lamb AS IF >IT WERE the Savior?" When Blake says, in that poem, to the speechless lamb: >"I'll tell thee--" Sure he will. For one thing, he's the artist. For >another, he's a person with the power to do many more things than a lamb >can do. But do we all want to be like lambs that can get led to the >slaughter? Half of the dialectic is missing in this poem, to be fulfilled >in _Experience_ with "The Tyger". Well, how many of Blake's ideas pass the "reality" test? But this idea of self-annihilation is problematic, I agree. Yet that 's the essence of Milton's triumph in _Milton_ (I know that's your favorite text, Randall!), and it doesn't seem to me to be synonymous with being a lamb or being slaughtered. To me, the Selfhood he renounces is Satan, a destructive principle that denies the *common* nature of humanity so as to cut us off from one another, whereas Jesus, who represents the opposite, physically enters into each person so as to unite them. >>Just as Orc sends back the plagues onto Albion's Angel, Jesus >>challenges "The God of this World" who is "a Smiter with disease.">>> > >When did Jesus, in The Bible, ever challenge his father? > Sorry: when I compared Orc to Jesus, I meant to Blake's version of Jesus, not necessarily the Biblical one. But as Blake (or The Devil) points out in _MHH_, Jesus did challenge the laws of his father in a sense, by breaking the sabbath and so on. Jennifer Michael ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 16:13:44 -0800 From: george@nowhere.georgecoates.org (George Coates) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: "reply to" problems on the Blake list Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Blakeans: > >Um, several things have gone wrong with the list in the past couple of days. >Please remember -- when you reply to a Blake message, your message goes to >hundreds of people all around the world at the address "blake@albion.com". >Before you send a reply, please check the "To:" field in your mailer -- if >it's a personal message, then be sure to address it properly. > >For example, if you want to take up Patricia Neill on her kind offer to send >a sample issue, don't just hit "reply" and send it to everyone at >blake@albion.com. Send it to her personal address at >"pnpj@db1.cc.rochester.edu". > >Another example: if you're upset about a spam, don't exponentially compound >the problem by posting your ire to the whole list. JUST LET IT GO! If for >some >reason you really need to vent: SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE SPAMMER, NOT THE WHOLE >LIST. Again, check the "To:" field in your mailer -- ironically, the spammer >in question NEVER EVEN SAW ANY OF YOUR RESPONSES since they were addressed to >the list and he's not on it. > >Finally, please send all administrative requests to blake-request@albion.com. >This includes subscription/unsubscription requests as well as reports on list >problems, including spams and other attacks. Both Mark Trevor Smith and I >will see it and be able to respond accordingly. Now, let's return to our >regularly-scheduled Blake programming. > >Onward! >Seth Ross >Albion Sysadmin > >"Now consumed by flames of fire >Now consumed by iron wire ..." > >PS To leave Blake Online, send an email message to blake-request@albion.com >with the word "unsubscribe" in the SUBJECT field, like so: > TO: blake-request@albion.com > SUBJECT: unsubscribe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 18:53:02 -0500 From: David Eholnikof To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: "reply to" problems on the Blake list Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961107235302.0068ba30@ica.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Dear Mr. Ross, Please note, this return message in the public forum is for all "Blakeans". Being only my humble assumption of public forum are for all to see. >Um, several things have gone wrong with the list in the past couple of days. It might have been handier to "drop" a short note advising some difficulties could be experienced for a few days due to . . . >For example, if you want to take up Patricia Neill on her kind offer to send >a sample issue, don't just hit "reply" and send it to everyone at >blake@albion.com. Send it to her personal address at "pnpj@db1.cc.rochester.edu". Your tip is well taken and some of us could learn how to better use our system. I do look forward and welcome information such as Patricia Neill has offered. >Another example: if you're upset about a spam, don't exponentially compound >the problem by posting your ire to the whole list. JUST LET IT GO! If for some >reason you really need to vent: SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE SPAMMER, NOT THE WHOLE >LIST. Again, check the "To:" field in your mailer -- ironically, the spammer >in question NEVER EVEN SAW ANY OF YOUR RESPONSES since they were addressed to >the list and he's not on it. Sorry, but ignoring bad manners, does not improve the refinement of them. I included my messages to the "Blakeans" for informational purposes only. Although I AM CERTAIN the spammers got my messages directly as well. Which brings us to one last point. If they're not on the list, how did they contact everyone on the list? One of the "problems", I presume. Now I'm content to fade back into the shadows "whence I came 'till dawn of the new day" Sincerely Yours, David A. Eholnikof cc ----------------------------------------------------- Programmers Inc and SPD | Smart Product Development David Eholnikof, cc | Fax 905.272.4838 902 - 2100 Sherobee Rd | Phone 905.272.4015 Mississauga, Ontario | suburb of Toronto Canada L5A 4C5 | EMail David@ica.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 20:15:56 -0500 From: albright@world.std.com (R.H. Albright) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Nietzsche, Lawrence, Blake and God Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Jennifer: First, I want to thank you for making non-academics feel welcome on this list. Secondly, yes, according to the Devil's doctrine in "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell"-- your points are valid. Thirdly, yes, your points on "Milton" sound valid, my favorite poem NOT. And I wonder how much Fred Nietzsche would have gleaned from that epic, as well as "Jerusalem". Because to me they sound like a man trying to reconcile things in his head, which had grown exponentially larger, by the way, that he had blown into far more interesting questions earlier in his career. Now, to give the Devil (yeah, right...) his due, Michael Davis points out in his book, _William Blake, A New Kind of Man_, that Milton had to be brought back because he "erred in his seventeenth-century life by placing reason above imagination and by denying sex, after the Fall, the quality of divine inspiration." Now certainly there's more going on in that poem than this mechanistic statement, but at least it's a start. And actually, I think Fred would have agreed with this, although, living less than a century later, he threw Christianity out the window instead of trying to refabulate it into this revolutionary creed that Blake made it. Also, I do note that certain "liberation theologies", particularly in the Catholic faith, have used Christianity for purposes that may be in sympathy with what Blake was trying to accomplish. So... it's complicated, isn't it! Not only that, but I'm going to say that Blake has a GREAT DEAL to do with reality, at his best. He captures complications well. And, as a way back to my initial thanks to you letting non-academics on this list feel welcome, I must say that the _Songs_ that I enjoy today gain depth every time I read them. Maybe it's because I'm trying to stain the water clear? Or stain the clear water? The _Songs_ are rarely discussed, it seems, on this list unless some high school kid comes in and wants to know what "The Poison Tree" is all about, and yet I've had a private discussion with a college student who is familiar with "Milton" and "Jerusalem" (as well as "Finnegan's Wake"...), and agreed with me that we should not underestimate the complexity in those songs. The knots, the beauty... it's LIFE. It's REAL. Take care, one and all--- Randall Albright http://world.std.com/~albright/ from "There Are No Gods" by D.H. Lawrence "There are no gods, and you can please yourself have a game of tennis, go out in the car, do some shopping, sit and talk, talk, talk with a cigarette browning your fingers... "But leave me alone, leave me alone, to myself! and then in the room, whose is the presence that makes the air so still and lovely to me?... "I tell you, it is no woman, it is no man, for I am alone. And I fall asleep with the gods, the gods that are not, or that are according to the soul's desire, like a pool into which we plunge, or do not plunge." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:10:30 -0500 From: WaHu@aol.com To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? Message-Id: <961107221028_1781581662@emout11.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 96-11-07 14:02:16 EST, you write: << When did Jesus, in The Bible, ever challenge his father? >> Maybe "Eli,Eli, lama sabathanai?" (Say it in a cadenced chant, like a football cheer). And of course we know in Paradise Lost that Poppa God lets junior drive the car. He shows up for the War in Heaven in the Chariot of Paternal Dietie....a scene straight out of Road Warrior. Kickin some rebel angel butt. What I miss in Blake that is in most every other poet of his scope and ambition is lots of passages of unselfconscious slaughter and mayhem. And sex. The sex is wilder and kinkier and stranger in Spenser. And in Milton. I mean, there is violence in Blake, but some jerk in the background is always feeling bad about it. When Christ's buddy cut off the soldier's ear, Christ didn't offer to glue it back on.[Mark14:47--just before the appearance of the streaker] Blake doesn't believe in God. Belief is always in a fiction. Blake KNOWS God. I know it snows in Winter. I don't believe it snows in winter. What I believe in is aliens from other planets. They don't exist, so I have to believe in them. Maybe they exist, but even at warp speed, Mr. Sulu, they'd never get here. Hugh Walthall wahu@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 23:34:58 EST From: raven15@juno.com (John A Strong) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: blake quarterly Message-Id: <19961107.233024.8958.1.raven15@juno.com> Unsub blake signoff blake ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 09:09:46 +0200 From: P Van Schaik To: blake@albion.com Subject: Selflessness vs Selfhood/ divine vs earthly reality Message-Id: Randall, As you say, Blake sees everything that lives as holy. One needs to ask why he does so and then one comes back to the answer that this is so because the divine light within all that exists on earth is not completely extinguished - despite the many contractions into matter which finally produce mortal beings. God's mercy prevented the Fall into utter extinction and eternal death, in Blake's view. Selflessness does not represent `only one truth', nor a `half truth' in Blake's vision because everything he writes fits into the wider context of contraries. For example: his use of imagery consistently delineates Innocence as associated with Expansion, Unity, Harmony, Wholeness of Being through Christ and Jerusalem with God, Light, and refusal to become embedded in the ego-self or Selfhood which can lead to the delusions to which Urizen succumbs. Experience is consistently delineated in terms of images which are the contrary of these: of contraction into the selfish separateness of the Selfhood, so forfeiting the the unity of the divine brotherhood. In Innocence the contraries are complementary, but Blake perceives the fallen world as a Negation, not a complementary contrary to divine human existence in Eternity. One can impose any meaning on Blake's images and symbols if they are wrenched out of the wider context of his entire vision of the Fall and Redemption....we all appropriate Blake in our own ways, but , having once seen the magnificent scope of his work, it becomes impossible to read him in any other light than as the most ardent champion of selfnessness. Since Jesus is a central figure in both Eternity and this world, in Blake's poetry, we have to be open to the strong possibility that BLake uncompromisingly equates Innocnece with the most god-like behaviour. This does not mean that he is unaware of the generally selfish devouring nature of all that exists on earth... his own division of all that lives into the classes of `Prolific' and `Devourer' makes this clear. So, to believe passionately in the divine origins and ultimate divine humanity of all that lives on earth (peacocks, grass, clouds, worms, clay etc) is not indicative of lack of a sense of reality. Like Plato, Blake perceives a higher order of reality underlying the veils and masks of matter. So do many other mystical writers. Today we have no difficulty accepting that matter is mostly space with sub-atomic particles orbiting in an electro-magnetic field. The many writings about near-death experiences and past life regressions are helping to open our minds to the possibility that Blake saw truly the nature of reality, too. Pam van Schaik ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 09:11:04 +0200 From: P Van Schaik To: blake@albion.com, albright@world.std.com Subject: Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? -Reply Message-Id: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 12:26:02 +0200 From: P Van Schaik To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? -Reply Message-Id: Dear Randall, I wrote a detailed reply to this but it seems to have vanished instead of been sent. Perhaps becauses I tried to prevent you getting double mail by tampering with the TO list... your reply to Sender alone has the Blake at albion .com in the window whereas Send to all begins with your address. ...I got a bit confused. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 07:46:02 -0500 From: UNGPAKORN <106165.613@compuserve.com> To: BLAKE Subject: God, the universe and everthing (and Mr Blake!) Message-Id: <199611080747_MC1-BCA-9D10@compuserve.com> Hi all, Thanx to all who have volunteered to answer my provocation, its not done maliciously but with intent to stimulate debate on subject/s that I am unsure on. You'll excuse me if I dont comment too much myself but be happy that I am learning from you. I feel a bit like a small boy at the zoo, poking the tigers (tygers?) with a sharp stick through the bars of the cage to see what happens, then watching the fun. Although I agree with the majority that Blake was a beliver I feel that his comentry on things spiritual had too much humor and biterness to conclude he was an avid fan of any god and certainly a major critic of so called godly people. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 08:46:42 -0600 From: jmichael@seraph1.sewanee.edu (J. Michael) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: "GOD" and Mr Blake? Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Blake doesn't believe in God. Belief is always in a fiction. Blake KNOWS >God. I know it snows in Winter. I don't believe it snows in winter. What I >believe in is aliens from other planets. They don't exist, so I have to >believe in them. Maybe they exist, but even at warp speed, Mr. Sulu, they'd >never get here. Good point, Hugh. How does it go?--"Faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen." Blake *saw* it all (through, not with, the eye). Jennifer Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 09:47:59 -0500 (EST) From: dpvintin@acpub.duke.edu (Giles David) To: blake@albion.com Subject: Golgonooza Message-Id: <199611081447.JAA19227@argus.acpub.duke.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Turns out a friend of mine is throwing a cocktail party this weekend - you'll never guess the name of the house. Golgonooza at Frog Level! Straight up! He's quite a celebrated poet hereabouts - most recent book being 'Visions of Dame Kind' published by The Jargon Society. They do great covers. Anyway, if I'm gonna go party with the poets, and not be a total pumpkin, I'm gonna need some stuff on Golgonooza. Somebody help me out here. Tell me from the inside. A few choice soundbites will suffice. Just enough so's I can pass muster when some bearded professor or other asks, "How exactly ARE you building Golgoonaza?" High and lofty ideals about Blakean egalitarianism is one thing, putting your money where your mouth is, is another! There's a fish eggs on biscuit through the post, for the first among you who gives me the jem I'm looking for. Giles ............................................................................... "Is a kerygma possible after Finnegan's Wake? Perhaps only by assuming the posture of a clown can one succeed in obliquely communicating a serious message" (Joseph S. O'Leary, 'The Spipitual Upshot of Ulysses' in An Introduction to Celtic Christianity edited by James P. Mackey.) ............................................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 10:42:15 -0500 (EST) From: Leigh A Vrabel To: blake@albion.com Subject: Re: Fwd: Halloween Humor Message-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Pieter Joubert: Although I agree that excluding humor from every aspect of our academic lives would constitute fragmenting the Eternal Man, I would have to argue that balance and proportion are still the order of the day. I enjoy a good laugh more than just about anybody, but there is an appointed time for everything under the sun (shameful paraphrase of Ecclesiastes). When one Zoa intrudes into the dominion of another and tries to usurp its functions, Albion shatters. I do applaud your effort to incorporate a Blakean twist into the "Bart-Man"'s intrusion. I suppose I am also a little biased, as I know Scott fairly well on a professional level...and I assure you that he is a highly amusing fellow around the office...:) Leigh Vrabel -------------------------------- End of blake-d Digest V1996 Issue #127 **************************************