Login   Sign Up 



 
Random Read




  • Let`s Talk Lit Mags, once again.
    by Silverelli at 15:56 on 15 February 2005
    I came across this a while ago and I am extremely impressed by the writing here.

    http://www.cherrybleeds.com/

    Loved to hear what you guys think of it.
    You have to read "Don't Forget To Swagger".

  • Re: Let`s Talk Lit Mags, once again.
    by JoPo at 20:53 on 15 February 2005
    Silverelli

    Yes, just read it on your say so. A Scotch writer, or wannabe Scotch, wannabe Irving Welsh? Think I'll read it again. I take the bio with a pinch of salt though. Back in the late 70s it was terribly politically correct for a certain social class of woman (middle class, educated at university) to claim to be or have been a sex worker - I knew a couple of them, one of whom was a solicitor (like a real lawyer) but worked as a stripper in pubs in Deptford in her spare time and 'sold it' on the side. The other was an ex-Scientologist. Good company though.

    I like visiting Flanders myself. Can't say I've ever seen anyone using a tomato as a scumbag. But this writing (to get back to the writing before I'm bombed off) has something I like, God knows what it is though. Thanks for the intro.

    Joe

    <Added>

    Sorry, I was a bit pissed when I wrote this and I may not have expressed myself too well. What I mean is that what people of my acquaintance were doing, or claiming to be doing, was seen by them as a challenge to patriarchy. My intuition told me some were were shooting a line (and maybe the author of the piece Silverelli has linked to is boosting her CV a little by claiming to have been a 'hooker', but how would I know, really?) Not my Deptford acquaintance though, from what I can tell she was heavy duty, but the ex-Scientologist probably was embroidering the story (no disprespect intended to any followers of L Ron Hubbard, of course). I also don't mean to imply this political stance was particularly widespread - although if it was, it certainly wouldn't bother me. 'Nihil human putam est' and all that (I think).
    Oh well, time to stop digging. Apologies to anyone I've offended.

    Joe

    <Added>

    Er, try 'humanum'! I'm still not sure what it all means!

    Jow, er try Joe