not logged in
| re: Been Having So Much Fun, Thanks! | |
Posted by:  |
pidunk 04:36 am UTC 04/22/07 |
| In reply to: | re: Been Having So Much Fun, Thanks! - fallingtofly 03:32 am UTC 04/22/07 |
> Wow. I try to be nice and supportive, and you certainly > do take it the worst way possible, now don't you? I really don't know what you mean by this. I'm sorry you feel that way. I did not mean to give that impression. I believe that you were between critical and diplomatic, for a balance between, and if the spectrum wound up on one side of my reply more than the other it was probably as you suggest that I was feeling some defensive feelings. To the spots where I believe you were being supportive, I believe that I tried to respond. But, it is not easy to respond in a way you expect, when my life is so much not what you might expect. And please accept my apology for an impression poorly made. Some words you used did press a button or two; we all have buttons, you know. The worst way possible, is far away from the way that I took your post. I did not take it the worst way possible. I did not fall away and shrink at some strong statements you made to the effect that you believed I should. If I misconstrued your meaning, that is not a reason to chafe at me. I find the least tolerance of all the world in these issues, where I could find more tolerance every other place I ever go, anytime I ever go there. If I make assumptions that someone is going to give me latitude, those assumptions are the faults of my own idealism. > > Out of all your very long and winding redress, I'm only > going to answer one question: What would I do if someone > attempted to steal my work? > Long and winding. Yes. I've been doing that long and winding stuff....the more nervous I am the more words I come out with because I want to be understood. If you really cared about the person I am, you might be interested in what kinds of things I feel when I am dealing with issues I'd rather did not exist. But, that does not really matter. I am an adult and I deal with my feelings. You don't have to coddle me, but you don't have to react as though I am as cold as the pixels on the screen. > The same thing I've done in the past (unfortunately, the > downside to previewing work on a public website is that > you do get the occasional crook)- calmly report it to the > proper authorities, produce my proof of > copyright/authentication/etc and move on, issue dealt > with. Every artist I know, be it painter, author, > musician or otherwise, deals with it the same way. Some people don't have the same options as others, or the same circumstances. I don't believe that Jim can't take care of himself. One of the reasons why I am here is because he took care of himself so well that he painted his life into a corner. No, he didn't go to the court to say that he wrote it and show things. No, he didn't alert authorities to it. It wasn't as clear cut as that someone decided to snippet out his work and put their name on it. They took his identity and put their life to it. Plaigerism is one thing, and identity theft is another. How can one go about making an identity theft of this nature without help from others? Thus begins the germination of this growth of a problem that is beyond the normal. Jim took excellent care of himself, by avoiding the issue because the issue was very complicated with layers of problems. Jim could still take care of himself, and why I have to say anything is to lend to him support and impetence in order to be motivated in doing so. What I know about Jim is that he wants to be understood. He does not show it, his skin is very thick that way. But he shows it to me. He shows it to you in his works that you play and evaluate singers about. You can see it or not as you choose, but my writing is so that he sees that I care. > > Contrary to popular belief, most artists of any type are > neither fragile or detached from reality. We can fight > our own battles, and prefer to do so with minimum fuss and > mess. > There are different opinions about what strengths what people have and how the strengths are drawn upon. I have no argument with you about that. But where in your experience has Jim imparted any impression that he is like most artists? > I'm sure you can give Jim Steinman the respect he deserves > by acknowledging he is quite capable of doing the same. Jim is quite the police of his own perception of when and when not I am expressing respect of him. We have much history along these lines. Jim deserves the respect he feels he needs. What he needs, is his needs, not the needs of someone else, not the needs that other people have, and what he needs, he can often provide for himself, except, in so many ways he is needing this out in the open, and why should n't it be? > I'm sure that a person doesn't live as long or > accomplished life as he has without finding their own > footing and strengths in whatever battles life pitches his > way. Jim did indeed make his adaptations in the ways that I describe. > > I suppose I should be flattered that you are so interested > in my sites- if I could even remember which ones I linked > here. I am fascinated by your openness to share about yourself, but the first look I took was that I wanted to know more about the person who suggested that I should either be pitied or on psychotropic medications. I wanted to know more about the person who said that because I was engaged at the age of five that it meant that I should be able to see how much in common with your family life I have and trivialize it. I wanted to know where a child with a virtual harem gets his impression he should have one, and why that is validation to dismiss the importance of the early associations I have had with Jim, as well as Jim's would-be rivals. And, why it mattered to anyone that they would marry me at all, is not something that had to do with a 1962 popular culture trend. Probably the Xanga blog, and possibly Slow Poison. > Should be- but I'm more amused than anything. When you link, do you not hope to have visitors? Why be amused? Oops, wrong visitor? I've never > much seen the point in giving people a reason to dig > through the metaphorical trash for something to gossip > about- and this way what I want private stays private. > Not sure if this is the way you meant it or not,but sly > references to my sites doesn't get a reaction from me. That your husband is porking a woman you can't stand in your home with your practically looking on and victimizing the kids by making them go out with you so he could have your jollies, by breaking your heart and your trust of love and friendship and dignity, is not something I believed you wanted me to write about. But, since you really hated my vagueness, let me just say that my heart goes out to you. > It's cute- rather like my boys bringing me a frog and > expecting me to be squicked. I left the frog in the other pocket. > > I've tried to be polite and friendly to you, but obviously > that isn't something you want or are willing to accept, > choosing instead to see my response as an attack on you. Even when you want to be polite, and I mean the proverbial "you" not the "you" "you", it is so hard when in the room full of crazy criticizers and foul mouthed verbal abusers that some of the people on the board are. I fully appreciate your attempt. It's just a lousy initiation to this virtual acquaintance. Some people would then say, "I don't want to know you you bitch how dare you call me an acquaintance!" So, whatever word says what "communicating people" to you. > So, sweetheart, have fun. I'm going to go sit over here > and watch with mild interest while the jackals rip you to > pieces through the opening you gave them. The jackals be the nature that they are, and the opening is the one by their own teeth. Let's figure out this balance, as I have no quarrel with you. > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Been Having So Much Fun, Thanks! - fallingtofly 03:32 am UTC 04/22/07 |
| Next: | re: Been Having So Much Fun, Thanks! - fallingtofly 02:24 pm UTC 04/22/07 |
| Thread: |
|