<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What Kind of NEA will Landesman Create?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/</link>
	<description>A National Blog of Literature &#38; Discussion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:47:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2919</link>
		<dc:creator>G. Tod Slone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 14:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2919</guid>
		<description>Apparently, to view the comments, one must make a comment?  Odd.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apparently, to view the comments, one must make a comment?  Odd.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2917</link>
		<dc:creator>G. Tod Slone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 14:06:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2917</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t even find the comments to this article.  The link on the email I received, announcing a comment has been made, takes me here.  When I locate where it says 7 comments and press that button, I still don&#039;t get the comments.   Where are they?  Do I want spend all morning hunting for them?  Nope.  Anyhow, congrats to VQR for NOT censoring (filtering, moderating or whatever other inane euphemism bourgeois academics and literati prefer calling it today)!  It clearly stands apart in that sense.  The Academy of American Poets, for example, censored all comments I made on its forum and even banned me from future participation.  No bad words, no threats, nada.  In fact, I was trying to hawk the journal I edit at a local library.  The ref lady called the cops on me, then issued a no-trespass warrant.  Wow.  Watertown Free Public Library.  Talk about thin skin.  Democracy demands THICK, not thin easily offended skin.  Inside Higher Ed has censored my comments 3 times.  Does anyone give a damn.  Certainly not Cary Nelson, AAUP president!  My comments were censored regarding his article against censorship!  Nelson remained silent when I wrote him about it.  Censorship is on the increase in America.

On another note, far too many intelligent, educated literati seem entirely incapable of questioning and challenging THE GIVEN.  It is astonishing to me how often statements are issued as if made in gold:  &quot;one of the most important quarterlies in the country&quot; or nominated for this or got that award.  Why don&#039;t people wonder who, for example, who makes these determinations behind the scenes?  Because a board of NEA panelists designated The American Dissident, the literary journal I edit, as &quot;poor&quot; and &quot;low&quot; does not, for example, necessarily mean it is &quot;poor&quot; and &quot;low.&quot;  For those fellows, it sure was.  But why?  Did the journal&#039;s penchant for criticizing bourgeois fellows of the established order have anything to do with it?  Certainly!  Did the journal&#039;s criticism of the NEA have anything to do with it?  Well, let&#039;s allow you to answer that one.

Would Aja, freshly minted from UV&#039;s MFA have the guts and intelligence to question and challenge... UV&#039;s MFA program?  Well, let&#039;s allow you to answer that one.

G. Tod Slone, Founding Editor
The American Dissident:  Journal of Literature, Democracy &amp; Dissidence
A 501 c3 Nonprofit Providing a Forum for Vigorous Debate, Cornerstone of Democracy
www.theamericandissident.org
1837 Main St. 
Concord, MA 01742</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t even find the comments to this article.  The link on the email I received, announcing a comment has been made, takes me here.  When I locate where it says 7 comments and press that button, I still don&#8217;t get the comments.   Where are they?  Do I want spend all morning hunting for them?  Nope.  Anyhow, congrats to VQR for NOT censoring (filtering, moderating or whatever other inane euphemism bourgeois academics and literati prefer calling it today)!  It clearly stands apart in that sense.  The Academy of American Poets, for example, censored all comments I made on its forum and even banned me from future participation.  No bad words, no threats, nada.  In fact, I was trying to hawk the journal I edit at a local library.  The ref lady called the cops on me, then issued a no-trespass warrant.  Wow.  Watertown Free Public Library.  Talk about thin skin.  Democracy demands THICK, not thin easily offended skin.  Inside Higher Ed has censored my comments 3 times.  Does anyone give a damn.  Certainly not Cary Nelson, AAUP president!  My comments were censored regarding his article against censorship!  Nelson remained silent when I wrote him about it.  Censorship is on the increase in America.</p>
<p>On another note, far too many intelligent, educated literati seem entirely incapable of questioning and challenging THE GIVEN.  It is astonishing to me how often statements are issued as if made in gold:  &#8220;one of the most important quarterlies in the country&#8221; or nominated for this or got that award.  Why don&#8217;t people wonder who, for example, who makes these determinations behind the scenes?  Because a board of NEA panelists designated The American Dissident, the literary journal I edit, as &#8220;poor&#8221; and &#8220;low&#8221; does not, for example, necessarily mean it is &#8220;poor&#8221; and &#8220;low.&#8221;  For those fellows, it sure was.  But why?  Did the journal&#8217;s penchant for criticizing bourgeois fellows of the established order have anything to do with it?  Certainly!  Did the journal&#8217;s criticism of the NEA have anything to do with it?  Well, let&#8217;s allow you to answer that one.</p>
<p>Would Aja, freshly minted from UV&#8217;s MFA have the guts and intelligence to question and challenge&#8230; UV&#8217;s MFA program?  Well, let&#8217;s allow you to answer that one.</p>
<p>G. Tod Slone, Founding Editor<br />
The American Dissident:  Journal of Literature, Democracy &amp; Dissidence<br />
A 501 c3 Nonprofit Providing a Forum for Vigorous Debate, Cornerstone of Democracy<br />
<a href="http://www.theamericandissident.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.theamericandissident.org</a><br />
1837 Main St.<br />
Concord, MA 01742</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob Silverman</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2916</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob Silverman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 06:43:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2916</guid>
		<description>Mr. Slone,

I don&#039;t think you have to worry about censorship here; rather all comments on VQR, I believe, must be approved for posting to make sure spam doesn&#039;t get through (which this blog gets its fair share of). But dissent and constructive critiques are welcome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. Slone,</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think you have to worry about censorship here; rather all comments on VQR, I believe, must be approved for posting to make sure spam doesn&#8217;t get through (which this blog gets its fair share of). But dissent and constructive critiques are welcome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2915</link>
		<dc:creator>G. Tod Slone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 15:12:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2915</guid>
		<description>Sorry.  I just noted my comments were posted.  Not easy to locate for some reason, especially when your blog notes &quot;O Comments.&quot;  Again, my apologies.  I am quite sensitive to being censored because I&#039;ve been censored by the Academy of American Poets, Inside Higher Ed, NewPages.com, and elsewhere.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry.  I just noted my comments were posted.  Not easy to locate for some reason, especially when your blog notes &#8220;O Comments.&#8221;  Again, my apologies.  I am quite sensitive to being censored because I&#8217;ve been censored by the Academy of American Poets, Inside Higher Ed, NewPages.com, and elsewhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2914</link>
		<dc:creator>G. Tod Slone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 15:10:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2914</guid>
		<description>Aja, did you censor the comments I made last night on your entry?  Is that what it&#039;s come to in the USA today:  censor all voices that one does not like?  What kind of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy, does that make?  The following were the comments I made.  Please do reconsider posting them and please do educate yourself and examine the First Amendment of the US Constitution and study the following statement made by the US Supreme Court in 1949 (Terminello vs. Chicago):  &quot;[A] function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute.  It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging.  It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea.  That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute… is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment...&quot;         

G. Tod Slone Says: May 16th, 2009 at 10:21 pm Problem with the NEA is that it tends to fund bourgeois established-order writers only. It vehemently rejects anyone apt to criticize it or even challenge its staff to debate. It is an autocratic agency that serves the status quo, of which I suspect you form part. Can’t seem to find Ted G’s email address. I wanted to inform him that Inside Higher Ed censored my comments RE the New England Review this week… to see if he’d give a damn… not about the comments but about censorship. Those comments, BTW, constitute my latest blog: http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/. Check it out. You might chuckle at the cartoon I did on Parini sitting on top of a loaf of Wunderbrot. What strikes me most about the American literary scene today is its uncannily anchored bourgeois nature. Few even question and challenge it. Well, will my comments be censored? That seems to be a bourgeois activity of predilection. Or is VQR actually a rare academic proponent of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy?
G. Tod Slone Says: May 16th, 2009 at 10:21 pm PS: Evidently Landesman was chosen because he’d continue in the bourgeois tradition of the NEA and Dana Gioia.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aja, did you censor the comments I made last night on your entry?  Is that what it&#8217;s come to in the USA today:  censor all voices that one does not like?  What kind of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy, does that make?  The following were the comments I made.  Please do reconsider posting them and please do educate yourself and examine the First Amendment of the US Constitution and study the following statement made by the US Supreme Court in 1949 (Terminello vs. Chicago):  &#8220;[A] function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute.  It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging.  It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea.  That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute… is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment&#8230;&#8221;         </p>
<p>G. Tod Slone Says: May 16th, 2009 at 10:21 pm Problem with the NEA is that it tends to fund bourgeois established-order writers only. It vehemently rejects anyone apt to criticize it or even challenge its staff to debate. It is an autocratic agency that serves the status quo, of which I suspect you form part. Can’t seem to find Ted G’s email address. I wanted to inform him that Inside Higher Ed censored my comments RE the New England Review this week… to see if he’d give a damn… not about the comments but about censorship. Those comments, BTW, constitute my latest blog: <a href="http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/</a>. Check it out. You might chuckle at the cartoon I did on Parini sitting on top of a loaf of Wunderbrot. What strikes me most about the American literary scene today is its uncannily anchored bourgeois nature. Few even question and challenge it. Well, will my comments be censored? That seems to be a bourgeois activity of predilection. Or is VQR actually a rare academic proponent of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy?<br />
G. Tod Slone Says: May 16th, 2009 at 10:21 pm PS: Evidently Landesman was chosen because he’d continue in the bourgeois tradition of the NEA and Dana Gioia.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Waldo Jaquith</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2912</link>
		<dc:creator>Waldo Jaquith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 14:41:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2912</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;What a strange bias in favor of fresh ink, as opposed to quality.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You present a false dichotomy. Why not quality &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; freshness? Is it your belief that no recent work is quality work?

Additionally, I can&#039;t see why The Odyssey and Shakespeare are in need of government promotion. Most every high school student in the country reads at least one play by the bard. &lt;em&gt;Romeo &amp; Juliet&lt;/em&gt; was a smash hit for Leonardo DeCaprio, rendered entirely in the original tongue. &lt;em&gt;The Odyssey&lt;/em&gt; is nearly as widely read, and &lt;em&gt;O Brother Where Art Thou?&lt;/em&gt; was also an enormously popular movie that, while a reinterpretation, likewise spurred a great deal of interest in a work that hadn&#039;t exactly fallen out of favor. My guess is that the bulk of the NEA staff had already seen a production of or read the script for at least one Shakespeare play, and likewise read at least a portion of &lt;em&gt;The Odyssey.&lt;/em&gt; Thus no substantial benefit is likely to have resulted from having them read work with which they were already familiar.

Why subsidize something that&#039;s already doing so well in the free market?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>What a strange bias in favor of fresh ink, as opposed to quality.</p></blockquote>
<p>You present a false dichotomy. Why not quality <em>and</em> freshness? Is it your belief that no recent work is quality work?</p>
<p>Additionally, I can&#8217;t see why The Odyssey and Shakespeare are in need of government promotion. Most every high school student in the country reads at least one play by the bard. <em>Romeo &#038; Juliet</em> was a smash hit for Leonardo DeCaprio, rendered entirely in the original tongue. <em>The Odyssey</em> is nearly as widely read, and <em>O Brother Where Art Thou?</em> was also an enormously popular movie that, while a reinterpretation, likewise spurred a great deal of interest in a work that hadn&#8217;t exactly fallen out of favor. My guess is that the bulk of the NEA staff had already seen a production of or read the script for at least one Shakespeare play, and likewise read at least a portion of <em>The Odyssey.</em> Thus no substantial benefit is likely to have resulted from having them read work with which they were already familiar.</p>
<p>Why subsidize something that&#8217;s already doing so well in the free market?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Campbell Gallagher</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2910</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary Campbell Gallagher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 04:13:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2910</guid>
		<description>The Odyssey and Shakespeare are quite good.  Worth talking about, I should think.  What a strange bias in favor of fresh ink, as opposed to quality.

MCG</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Odyssey and Shakespeare are quite good.  Worth talking about, I should think.  What a strange bias in favor of fresh ink, as opposed to quality.</p>
<p>MCG</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2909</link>
		<dc:creator>G. Tod Slone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 02:21:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2909</guid>
		<description>PS:  Evidently Landesman was chosen because he&#039;d continue in the bourgeois tradition of the NEA and Dana Gioia.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PS:  Evidently Landesman was chosen because he&#8217;d continue in the bourgeois tradition of the NEA and Dana Gioia.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2908</link>
		<dc:creator>G. Tod Slone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 02:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2908</guid>
		<description>Problem with the NEA is that it  tends to fund bourgeois established-order writers only.  It vehemently rejects anyone apt to criticize it or even challenge its staff to debate.  It is an autocratic agency that serves the status quo, of which I suspect you form part.  Can&#039;t seem to find Ted G&#039;s email address.  I wanted to inform him that Inside Higher Ed censored my comments RE the New England Review this week... to see if he&#039;d give a damn... not about the comments but about censorship.  Those comments, BTW, constitute my latest blog:  http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/.  Check it out.  You might chuckle at the cartoon I did on Parini sitting on top of a loaf of Wunderbrot.  What strikes me most about the American literary scene today is its uncannily anchored bourgeois nature.  Few even question and challenge it.  Well, will my comments be censored?  That seems to be a bourgeois activity of predilection.   Or is VQR actually a rare academic proponent of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Problem with the NEA is that it  tends to fund bourgeois established-order writers only.  It vehemently rejects anyone apt to criticize it or even challenge its staff to debate.  It is an autocratic agency that serves the status quo, of which I suspect you form part.  Can&#8217;t seem to find Ted G&#8217;s email address.  I wanted to inform him that Inside Higher Ed censored my comments RE the New England Review this week&#8230; to see if he&#8217;d give a damn&#8230; not about the comments but about censorship.  Those comments, BTW, constitute my latest blog:  <a href="http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/</a>.  Check it out.  You might chuckle at the cartoon I did on Parini sitting on top of a loaf of Wunderbrot.  What strikes me most about the American literary scene today is its uncannily anchored bourgeois nature.  Few even question and challenge it.  Well, will my comments be censored?  That seems to be a bourgeois activity of predilection.   Or is VQR actually a rare academic proponent of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/05/16/rocco-landesman/#comment-2907</link>
		<dc:creator>G. Tod Slone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 02:20:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=2159#comment-2907</guid>
		<description>Problem with the NEA is that it  tends to fund bourgeois established-order writers only.  It vehemently rejects anyone apt to criticize it or even challenge its staff to debate.  It is an autocratic agency that serves the status quo, of which I suspect you form part.  Can&#039;t seem to find Ted G&#039;s email address.  I wanted to inform him that Inside Higher Ed censored my comments RE the New England Review this week... to see if he&#039;d give a damn... not about the comments but about censorship.  Those comments, BTW, constitute my latest blog:  http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/.  Check it out.  You might chuckle at the cartoon I did on Parini sitting on top of a loaf of Wunderbrot.  What strikes me most about the American literary scene today is its uncannily anchored bourgeois nature.  Few even question and challenge it.  Well, will my comments be censored?  That seems to be a bourgeois activity of predilection.   Or is VQR actually a rare academic proponent of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy?  

G. Tod Slone, Founding Editor
The American Dissident, a Journal of Literature, Democracy &amp; Dissidence
A 501 c3 nonprofit organization providing a forum for vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy,
And for examining the dark side of the academic/literary established-order milieu
www.theamericandissident.org
1837 Main St. 
Concord, MA 01742</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Problem with the NEA is that it  tends to fund bourgeois established-order writers only.  It vehemently rejects anyone apt to criticize it or even challenge its staff to debate.  It is an autocratic agency that serves the status quo, of which I suspect you form part.  Can&#8217;t seem to find Ted G&#8217;s email address.  I wanted to inform him that Inside Higher Ed censored my comments RE the New England Review this week&#8230; to see if he&#8217;d give a damn&#8230; not about the comments but about censorship.  Those comments, BTW, constitute my latest blog:  <a href="http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/</a>.  Check it out.  You might chuckle at the cartoon I did on Parini sitting on top of a loaf of Wunderbrot.  What strikes me most about the American literary scene today is its uncannily anchored bourgeois nature.  Few even question and challenge it.  Well, will my comments be censored?  That seems to be a bourgeois activity of predilection.   Or is VQR actually a rare academic proponent of vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy?  </p>
<p>G. Tod Slone, Founding Editor<br />
The American Dissident, a Journal of Literature, Democracy &amp; Dissidence<br />
A 501 c3 nonprofit organization providing a forum for vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy,<br />
And for examining the dark side of the academic/literary established-order milieu<br />
<a href="http://www.theamericandissident.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.theamericandissident.org</a><br />
1837 Main St.<br />
Concord, MA 01742</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

