[lit-ideas] Re: The Piano Man
- From: "Stan Spiegel" <writeforu2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 18:08:30 -0400
Eric: As for word play and puns, it's been shown that it takes a writer at
least a dozen puns to get one published.*** Hardly worth the trouble of
having an unknown mind is it?
Stan: That depends, of course, on where you work. My first job after college
as an English major was working for a Chinese food distributor in New York
City, writing luminously insightful things for Fortune Cookies. Within my
first 6 months, I'd gotten my acceptance rate up to nearly 50%. That's not
one out of twelve. That's more like one out of 2. Of course, I had to learn
to put my puns and prognostications into awkward English before they were
accepted by the immigrant owners of the firm. It certainly was a punishing
experience, having to produce at least 10 an hour and meet the verbal
standards of the man who owned the company: Ho-hum.
Your ability to create funny citations to support your viewpoint is
impressive. I once spent a summer -- 1969 in fact -- before BOOKS IN PRINT
was fully computerized teaching college students how to "style" (or stylize,
I'm not sure which) titles so they were ready for the data entry department.
For every lesson I taught -- using the overhead projector -- I created
dozens of funny book titles, giving the kids raw material for them to style
( or restyle) appropriately. Sometimes I think I'm better at making up the
titles for my work than actually writing.
In a more serious vein, it just proves that an unknown mind IS a terrible
thing to waste. Even Murray and Murray (whether they are one or two people)
would agree with that. AFter all, it's unnecessary to know Piaget in order
to have an unconscious, just necessary to be unconscious when you meet him,
don't you agree? I know Ho Hum would, if he's still around.
Stan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Yost" <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 5:10 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Piano Man
> Stan: I've read the Murray article -- and it doesn't even begin to
> explain why the Bridge response has been rejected. It's a lousy
> source to turn to.
>
> Eric: Granted, Murray and Murray can be gnomic, unfathomable, and
> unnecessarily lapidary. Plus the writing style is difficult. And
> indeed, much is left unanswered.
>
> For example, is Murray and Murray one person or two?* And is it
> necessary to know Piaget in order to have an unconscious? If so, how
> well does one have to know Piaget?**
>
> To me it's obvious that we have no idea what's going on in our
> minds. Otherwise we wouldn't all be insane. Whether a therapist can
> bring this repressed material to the surface and, indeed, what the
> surface is a surface of, remains sublimely inscrutable.
>
> As for word play and puns, it's been shown that it takes a writer
> at least a dozen puns to get one published.*** Hardly worth the
> trouble of having an unknown mind is it?
>
> ____
> * See Klopstock, Gervin, "Take it to the Bridge(s): Segue in the
> Bridges of Madison County," Lit-Ideas Press, Fresno, 2005.
>
> **See Tyner, McCoy, "To No-no-no You," American Bodybuilder, May, 1998.
>
> ***See Weary, Theoreticus, "No Pun In Ten Did: Failure in
> Publication Rates of Literary Pranks, Puns, and Anagrams," Newsweek,
> December, 1941.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
