SLSL Intro "Chicago School"

[barbara100 at jps.net]

> It makes no sense to talk about a failure due to lack of communication.
What 'failure' and >what sort of  communication and what in the world would
that communication be
> about?

The failure would be that the Movement didn't catch on, that the relatively
poor and powerless--the Beats, the hippies, the new leftists, and all the
colored collars--didn't band together to form a stronger political force.
That would be my guess.

What they might have to communicate is their commonality.  Commonality in in
being human, in being "relatively poor and powerless, in being "consumers of
what the media of the time [is] supplying us," that we suffer "imperfectly
developed attitudes about sex and death" too, that we're caught up in the
"same field of shit," that some in power want "to keep us strangers," want
to keep us "divided."  That's what the communication would be about.


"It may yet turn out that racial differences are not
as basic as questions of money and power, but have
served a useful purpose, often in the interest of
those who deplore them the most, in keeping us divided
and so relatively poor and powerless." (SL,  )

"The true sin was yours: to interdict that union.  To draw that line.  To
keep us worse than enemies, who are after all caught in the same field of
shit--to keep us strangers." (GR 862)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Fiero" <rfiero at pophost.com>

> I've no understanding of the concepts here. First of all,
> any-color-collar-workers are stakeholders in the status quo and
> wish to preserve it. It makes no sense to talk about a failure
> due to lack of communication. What 'failure' and what sort of
> communication and what in the world would that communication be
> about? Secondly, the charge of ageism cannot be supported.
> There are no examples. There are plenty of counter-examples. A
> twenty-six year old seems old to a seventeen year old. jbor is
> dreaming. Isn't the author talking about Puer Aeternis?
>