Ectoplasm

[RICHARD ROMEO]

davemarc at panix.com writes:

> Again, in a literal sense I have trouble with these references to They. 
  
 I
> honestly don't see any sense in bringing Them into a historical   
discussion.

Andrew Dinn counters:

>Well, that's rather the point isn't it. It's not just whether they can
>get you asking the right questions, it's also what kind of questions
>you are allowed to ask. I honestly don't see any possibility of not
>bringing Them into a historical discussion. History belongs to Them.

then jan wrote:
History may indeed belong to a literal Them, but it's mighty hard trying  
 
to prove it.  Every now 'n then we paranoids catch a glimpse, a face   
turning towards us, never quite settling or focusing, easy to misread as  
 
any ink blot, snatches, probably meaningless...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------
Could be that face is us sometimes, that's what freaks us out.  I believe 
in a literal They, but membership into that association is always in 
flux, seems to me, mirroring history in some way.  To put it more 
poetically, is anyone _truly_ innocent, is anyone _truly_ guilty?

Richard Romeo
Coordinator of Cooperating Collections
The Foundation Center-NYC
212-807-2417
rromeo at fdncenter.org