Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



because grub butt is a justice ʘ‿ʘ ([info]tez) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2011-02-05 18:45:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:books/authors, community: weepingcock, elitism, flouncing, mom the other kids aren't playing right!, persecution, porn

Henry Miller has a fandom...and it's pretty damn vocal.
Sex scenes can be really funny. Badly-written sex scenes can be absolutely hilarious. Since there are a lot of badly-written sex scenes in the world, the denizens of LJ's [info]weepingcock take it upon themselves to select the best of the worst and laugh uproariously at it. Or cringe. Or possibly laugh uproariously in a cringing fashion. It depends on the excerpt.

Anyhow, [info]pirsquar posts this amazing excerpt, for the enjoyment of the entire community.


"At night when I look at Boris' goatee lying on the pillow I get hysterical. O Tania, where now is that warm cunt of yours, those fat, heavy garters, those soft, bulging thighs? There is a bone in my prick six inches long. I will ream out every wrinkle in your cunt, Tania, big with seed. I will send you home to your Sylvester with an ache in your belly and your womb turned inside out. Your Sylvester! Yes, he knows how to build a fire, but I know how to inflame a cunt. I shoot hot bolts into you, Tania, I make your ovaries incandescent. Your Sylvester is a little jealous now? He feels something, does he? He feels the remnants of my big prick. I have set the shores a little wider. I have ironed out the wrinkles. After me you can take on stallions, bulls, rams, drakes, St. Bernards. You can stuff toads, bats, lizards up your rectum. You can shit arpeggios if you like, or string a zither across your navel. I am fucking you, Tania, so that you'll stay fucked. And if you are afraid of being fucked publicly I will fuck you privately. I will tear off a few hairs from your cunt and paste them on Boris' chin. I will bite into your clitoris and spit out two franc pieces…"


The reaction is a standard mix of 'lol', 'wtf', and 'OW'...

...at least, until Loyal Defender Of The Literary Mighty [info]deborahkla charges in to express her displeasure with the mere posting of this blurb.

Why?

Because it was written by Henry Miller.

Apparently, if you are a Noted Figure Of Literature, you are incapable of writing bad porn, regardless of what our eyes might be telling us. She makes sure to inform us of this. She even did it twice, in the exact same wording.


Wait a minute, folks! This is HENRY MILLER!!! I remember when his books were banned! You have to remember that all his books - including Tropic of Cancer, considered his finest work - were originally published in the 1920s when words like "prick" and "cunt" and "fuck" were never, EVER spoken aloud outside a brothel--and certainly not by regular folks, in bed or out.

I have to disagree wholeheartedly on this entry in weepingcock. It may sound funny to all of you now, but in the 1920s it was downright revolutionary, and it continued to be until the books were finally published in the mid-sixties, almost 40 years after they were banned. Henry Miller was a true poet, the James Joyce of obscenity and smut, and those of us who write both owe him a debt of gratitude for bringing the wild and woolly and truly passionate side of sex out into the open.



Despite the condescending tone, the [info]weepingcock natives are actually quite reasonable in pointing out that funny sex is not discriminating, and 'great authors' are not immune to mockery if they write and publish something weepingcock-worthy. For [info]deborahkla, however, 'reasonable disagreement' translates into 'OMFG EVERYONE'S ATTACKING ME'. So she attacks back...despite not being attacked in the first place. (She has mastered the use of the c&p comment, for sure -- there are several in there that she copies verbatim into multiple threads.)

She also flounces out of the community.

The only problem there is that she keeps right on posting answers to comments, actively telling people that 'she's out of the community now'. Her logic flaw is pointed out to her numerous times.

She reacts, naturally, by doing the most reasonable, mature thing possible.

She messages the mods.


To both the moderators at weepingcock

Dear moderators,

I disagreed with a posting at weepingcock that did not identify a quote from Henry Miller and was attacked for it. When I reacted defensively, I continued to be attacked. Finally, cwitch pointed out that everyone was fair game, and I agreed with her, but this wasn't enough for everyone. They continued to attack me and I continued to attempt to deflect their attacks. When it became clear that no one was ever going to forgive me for having had a difference of opinion, I left the community. Two hours after I had left the community yet ANOTHER person came along and attacked me with yet another nasty, uncalled for comment.

I am hereby asking your permission to delete all my comments in the post in question so that I may no longer receive nasty comments from people. Please let me know if I have permission to do so. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

DeborahKLA


(Of course just turning off comment notifications wouldn't be good enough -- the comments would still be there for people to make nasty, uncalled-for responses to, and she'd be obliged to go LOOK to see what those responses are, and then she'd have to respond, and...)

When she doesn't receive an answer in a timely fashion, she messages again:

Dear Moderators of weepingcock,

People continue to harass me with comments. Please give me permission to delete all the comments I made in the posting I referenced in my previous message so that people will leave me alone. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

DeborahKLA


When she again doesn't receive a reply in a timely fashion, she assumes that silence means assent and begins deleting all her comments anyway.

It is, however, worth noting that the first message was received at 5:33am Pacific time.

The second one?

5:42am.

(I have already spoken with the mods, and they are very ashamed about their slothfulness leading to such a mishap. They promise that in the future they will be awake 24/7 to handle inquiries and will respond to all messages within a matter of seconds, even if that message requires a large multi-paragraph answer.)

One of the mods did respond, though, and she was kind enough to bestow a reply on us.

Oh, and those deleted comments? Can't escape the screencaps.


I don't know about all of you, but I definitely feel my ovaries incandescing right now.



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]rganymede
2011-02-06 05:09 pm UTC (link)
Okay, so deborahkla kept posting the same cp'd reply to all the people horrified by the line "I will bite into your clitoris":

You're taking Miller's work far too literally. Henry Miller loved and respected women and knew his way around a clit. He was using the expression metaphorically. When one person says to another that they'd like to "rip off your clothes" or "bite you hard" it doesn't mean they're actually going to do so. In this passage Miller was trying to express the aching desperation of his passion.

Uhhh... Even if I take "I will bite into your clitoris" metaphorically, it's still horrible. Metaphorically, all I'm getting from it is: "I hate your ladyparts and want to damage them" or maybe even "Your ladyparts make me really horny, which pisses me off enough to want to damage them" or even just "I hate all women and want to hurt them for being women, in a way that can only be used on women".

The passage as a whole is all about harming Tania, with not a single word to even indicate the narrator wants her to get off from all this. Half the passage is about this Sylvester guy (who he wants to hurt indirectly by fucking Tania).

People with English degrees help me out, because I do not have the necessary qualifications to understand this! Is Miller really saying that Tania is Jesus, and they're both in Purgatory? A Purgatory of terrible sex scenes?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]tofuknight
2011-02-06 07:14 pm UTC (link)
No, you've got it all wrong. The aching desperation the OP ascribes to the narrator is like the id coming through a Jungian darkness into a Hydian light. The scene is truly revolutionary for its passionate and sensitive description of the first widely published homoerotic scene ever, sine what the narrator clearly wants to do is have vicarious copulation with Sylvester, who is his Pope in all of eternity.

So, actually, you got it all right. You win!
I had way to much caffeine already and was just trying to use big words. And I still think I make more sense than the wanker.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]visp
2011-02-06 10:00 pm UTC (link)
and knew his way around a clit.

Um... and she would know this... how?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]librarianmouse
2011-02-06 10:17 pm UTC (link)
Because of their imaginary trysts, of course.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]life_on_mars
2011-02-06 10:27 pm UTC (link)
Don't tell me they're married on the astral plane?

Now it all makes sense.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]snarkhunter
2011-02-10 03:31 pm UTC (link)
Possibly his letters...or Anais's. They're, um. Yeah.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]julian_black
2011-02-06 11:42 pm UTC (link)
The passage as a whole is all about harming Tania, with not a single word to even indicate the narrator wants her to get off from all this.

Ugh, yes. And Tania is nothing more than her cunt and her ovaries and her garter straps and her bulging thighs. The rest of her doesn't even exist. She's not a woman; she's a few choice cuts of meat. And the narrator's passion isn't enflamed by Tania herself, but rather by his contempt for Sylvester.

ARGH ARGH ARGH.

deborahkla: "Henry Miller loved and respected women and knew his way around a clit."

This sentence still amazes me. How can deborahkla know anything about Henry Miller and his relationships with women and believe he truly loved and respected them? Anais Nin is the one exception I can think of, but I think that was because she refused to leave her husband for him. She remained "the one who got away," the eternal "if-only" that he could love nostalgically. If she'd chosen Miller, however, I have little doubt he would have degraded her in the end, too.

And "[knowing] his way around a clit"? Pfft. As if that's proof against his being a misogynistic assbiscuit? LOL NO.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]suzycat
2011-02-07 11:58 pm UTC (link)
Most skilled shag I ever had is a misogynistic assbiscuit par excellence. Gotta say. Good at sex with girls =/= kind respectful man-feminist.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]oxfordcomma
2011-02-07 01:19 am UTC (link)
Well, speaking as someone who has several English degrees, I read it the same way you do. Also there's that bit about spitting out two franc pieces after biting Tania's clitoris, which -- what. Women and their distressing ladyparts! Literally turning sex into money! Whores.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]bubosquared
2011-02-07 10:27 am UTC (link)
Uhhh... Even if I take "I will bite into your clitoris" metaphorically, it's still horrible. Metaphorically, all I'm getting from it is: "I hate your ladyparts and want to damage them" or maybe even "Your ladyparts make me really horny, which pisses me off enough to want to damage them" or even just "I hate all women and want to hurt them for being women, in a way that can only be used on women".

So yes. Or even just "I am trying to turn you on by talking dirty, but am twarthed by my complete lack of knowledge about women's bodies, not that I'm about to admit to said lack. Do I make you horny, baby?" Which, er, no?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]warchio
2011-02-07 10:18 pm UTC (link)
I think she is getting a hyperbolic figure of speech confused with a metaphor. The line could be seen as being symbolic, but again, the choice of violent imagery does not lend itself to a romanticised reader of the extract. My reading of the piece would be that he is reacting violently to perceived sexual currency of a woman who has chosen to 'spend' that currency with another man. He wants to claim, to mark, it for himself.

Nor does the fact a piece of literature is important and/or respected exempt it from criticism. Chester Himes is an important writer, but the way he represented women is still problematic. (although not this problematic)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map