[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues...to the "good" writer

[seventhray27]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> >
> > snip
> > > Yes, I actually think Share's agent did write it. Am I correct
Share?
> > Because it didn't resemble anything you have ever written on this
forum
> > before - not in tone, content, wording or style.
> >
> >
> > Ann,
> >
> > That new lens cleaner you've been using seems to be working. Maybe
> > removing some of those little distortions you had before. (-:
>
> Well, apparently not. I wrote that post before reading that she had,
in fact, written it this morning. So my perception seems to be more
distorted than ever. You just think I am not being as MEAN to Share! I'm
not actually mean but I DO like to see where boundaries start and end.
>
I am just saying that I have always enjoyed Share's writing style,
especially the haikus and other bits of poetry she has recently shared. 
That's all.

Maybe that wasn't clear in some of the comments I've made.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues...to the "good" writer

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> 
> snip
> > Yes, I actually think Share's agent did write it. Am I correct Share?
> Because it didn't resemble anything you have ever written on this forum
> before - not in tone, content, wording or style.
> 
> 
> Ann,
> 
> That new lens cleaner you've been using seems to be working.  Maybe
> removing some of those little distortions you had before. (-:

Well, apparently not. I wrote that post before reading that she had, in fact, 
written it this morning. So my perception seems to be more distorted than ever. 
You just think I am not being as MEAN to Share! I'm not actually mean but I DO 
like to see where boundaries start and end.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues...to the "good" writer

[seventhray27]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:

snip
> Yes, I actually think Share's agent did write it. Am I correct Share?
Because it didn't resemble anything you have ever written on this forum
before - not in tone, content, wording or style.


Ann,

That new lens cleaner you've been using seems to be working.  Maybe
removing some of those little distortions you had before. (-:

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues...to the "good" writer

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I agree about individuals and couples being different at home than 
> > they are in public. How could it be otherwise? But I don't think I'm very 
> > good at aura effect any more. I've been around some of the leaders so that 
> > tends to cause the aura effect to evaporate. Again, I go by the feel or 
> > vibe or energy of a person: simply whether I do or don't like it.  
> > 
> > Now I'm thinking about the women's writing group containing: 1 woman whose 
> > writing I love but whose personality I don't; another whose personality and 
> > writing I love; another for whom I love neither her writing nor her 
> > personality. Others falling into the middle of the chart. My own writing is 
> > pretty abysmal in the group and I don't know why.
> 
> Now hold on there just a darn minute Missy! I respectfully disagree. Your 
> piece acting as your own agent to MJ Productions was pretty darn good. YMMV.

Yes, I actually think Share's agent did write it. Am I correct Share? Because 
it didn't resemble anything you have ever written on this forum before - not in 
tone, content, wording or style.
> 
> > My moods fluctuate in the group depending on whether or not someone is 
> > coughing in my face and reading her piece about how sick she is! BTW, FF is 
> > full of eccentrics now. And many of them are also creative. But MMMV (-: 
> > 
>  ____________________
> >  From: curtisdeltablues 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:01 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis
> > 
> > That was a good rap Share. Yes Maslow does have that self-actualization 
> > theory, and I guess you could call it optimal human development. I wasn't 
> > aware of Piaget's stages of cognitive development extended into an adult 
> > state comparable to Maslow's but I only studied him in relationship to how 
> > kids grow. I don't think that Maslow's self-actualization has too much in 
> > common with the Eastern view of enlightenment, because it lacks the more 
> > far flung claims about enlightenment. 
> > 
> > I think it is hard to judge how people really are when viewing them in a 
> > public capacity.  There is an aura effect we confer on people in front of a 
> > group.  That effect is magnified with the kind of context manipulation Raja 
> > Ram rolls with.  We really don't know how a couple acts behind closed doors 
> > by how they appear for what is really a political event with people 
> > watching them closely. For all we know he spends the rest of the evening 
> > ducking plates being flung at his head like in those Sofia Loren movies! 
> > 
> > So I guess the concept of optimal human development is not a concept I deal 
> > with inside or outside.  I tend to rate people on a scale of being 
> > interesting, and some of the most imbalanced people can rate higher then 
> > well adjusted ones.  For example, I have heard some of Raja Ram's lectures 
> > and find him as boring as a sack of rocks. So he might be a great guy in 
> > person and he certainly comes across as charming enough.  But I've given 
> > him a chance to show up with something of interest and he hasn't come 
> > through for me.  Actually that is a characteristic of the Batgap interviews 
> > I have listened to as well.  Optimal human development may either be a myth 
> > or be highly overrated. 
> > 
> > I'm with you on the lively engagement with the world criteria but I'm not 
> > sure them being "settled" has meaning or value for me.  Some of the most 
> > interesting people interact with are kind of nutjobs and I can only take 
> > them in small doses because of that.  But the way they challenge me is what 
> > I am seeking in interacting with them. 
> > 
> > I think most of the time I am seeking people out with shared interests and 
> > if they have a good sense of humor, and are passionate about their 
> > interests I can let most other well balanced traits slide. Many of the most 
> > interesting people for me are so hyper-focused that they lack some of the 
> > smoothness of better adjusted but less interesting people. (for me)  YMMV 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > laughing because I think of optimal human growth or development as a 
> > > Western idea rather than Eastern.  Wester

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues...to the "good" writer

[laughinggull108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Yeah, I agree about individuals and couples being different at home than they 
> are in public. How could it be otherwise? But I don't think I'm very good at 
> aura effect any more. I've been around some of the leaders so that tends to 
> cause the aura effect to evaporate. Again, I go by the feel or vibe or energy 
> of a person: simply whether I do or don't like it.  
> 
> Now I'm thinking about the women's writing group containing: 1 woman whose 
> writing I love but whose personality I don't; another whose personality and 
> writing I love; another for whom I love neither her writing nor her 
> personality. Others falling into the middle of the chart. My own writing is 
> pretty abysmal in the group and I don't know why.

Now hold on there just a darn minute Missy! I respectfully disagree. Your piece 
acting as your own agent to MJ Productions was pretty darn good. YMMV.

> My moods fluctuate in the group depending on whether or not someone is 
> coughing in my face and reading her piece about how sick she is! BTW, FF is 
> full of eccentrics now. And many of them are also creative. But MMMV (-: 
> 
 
>  From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:01 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis
> 
> That was a good rap Share. Yes Maslow does have that self-actualization 
> theory, and I guess you could call it optimal human development. I wasn't 
> aware of Piaget's stages of cognitive development extended into an adult 
> state comparable to Maslow's but I only studied him in relationship to how 
> kids grow. I don't think that Maslow's self-actualization has too much in 
> common with the Eastern view of enlightenment, because it lacks the more far 
> flung claims about enlightenment. 
> 
> I think it is hard to judge how people really are when viewing them in a 
> public capacity.  There is an aura effect we confer on people in front of a 
> group.  That effect is magnified with the kind of context manipulation Raja 
> Ram rolls with.  We really don't know how a couple acts behind closed doors 
> by how they appear for what is really a political event with people watching 
> them closely. For all we know he spends the rest of the evening ducking 
> plates being flung at his head like in those Sofia Loren movies! 
> 
> So I guess the concept of optimal human development is not a concept I deal 
> with inside or outside.  I tend to rate people on a scale of being 
> interesting, and some of the most imbalanced people can rate higher then well 
> adjusted ones.  For example, I have heard some of Raja Ram's lectures and 
> find him as boring as a sack of rocks. So he might be a great guy in person 
> and he certainly comes across as charming enough.  But I've given him a 
> chance to show up with something of interest and he hasn't come through for 
> me.  Actually that is a characteristic of the Batgap interviews I have 
> listened to as well.  Optimal human development may either be a myth or be 
> highly overrated. 
> 
> I'm with you on the lively engagement with the world criteria but I'm not 
> sure them being "settled" has meaning or value for me.  Some of the most 
> interesting people interact with are kind of nutjobs and I can only take them 
> in small doses because of that.  But the way they challenge me is what I am 
> seeking in interacting with them. 
> 
> I think most of the time I am seeking people out with shared interests and if 
> they have a good sense of humor, and are passionate about their interests I 
> can let most other well balanced traits slide. Many of the most interesting 
> people for me are so hyper-focused that they lack some of the smoothness of 
> better adjusted but less interesting people. (for me)  YMMV 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > laughing because I think of optimal human growth or development as a 
> > Western idea rather than Eastern.  Western as in Maslow and Piaget for 
> > example, though I would imagine there are other psychologists who speak of 
> > that.  Probably some educators too.
> > 
> > What happened when I was replying to your previous post about belief is 
> > that I suddenly became aware of a meta belief in me:  that optimal human 
> > development is always good.  Maybe similar to the Western thinking that 
> > economic growth is always good no matter what the consequences are to the 
> > environment.  That's partially what made me question my belief about 
> > optimal 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis

[Share Long]

Yeah, I agree about individuals and couples being different at home than they 
are in public.  How could it be otherwise?  But I don't think I'm very good at 
aura effect any more.  I've been around some of the leaders so that tends to 
cause the aura effect to evaporate.  Again, I go by the feel or vibe or energy 
of a person:  simply whether I do or don't like it.  

Now I'm thinking about the women's writing group containing:  1 woman whose 
writing I love but whose personality I don't; another whose personality and 
writing I love; another for whom I love neither her writing nor her 
personality.  Others falling into the middle of the chart.  My own writing is 
pretty abysmal in the group and I don't know why.  My moods fluctuate in the 
group depending on whether or not someone is coughing in my face and reading 
her piece about how sick she is!  BTW, FF is full of eccentrics now.  And many 
of them are also creative.  But MMMV (-:  





 From: curtisdeltablues 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis
 

  
That was a good rap Share.  Yes Maslow does have that self-actualization 
theory, and I guess you could call it optimal human development. I wasn't aware 
of Piaget's stages of cognitive development extended into an adult state 
comparable to Maslow's but I only studied him in relationship to how kids grow. 
I don't think that Maslow's self-actualization has too much in common with the 
Eastern view of enlightenment, because it lacks the more far flung claims about 
enlightenment. 

I think it is hard to judge how people really are when viewing them in a public 
capacity.  There is an aura effect we confer on people in front of a group.  
That effect is magnified with the kind of context manipulation Raja Ram rolls 
with.  We really don't know how a couple acts behind closed doors by how they 
appear for what is really a political event with people watching them closely. 
For all we know he spends the rest of the evening ducking plates being flung at 
his head like in those Sofia Loren movies! 

So I guess the concept of optimal human development is not a concept I deal 
with inside or outside.  I tend to rate people on a scale of being interesting, 
and some of the most imbalanced people can rate higher then well adjusted ones. 
 For example, I have heard some of Raja Ram's lectures and find him as boring 
as a sack of rocks. So he might be a great guy in person and he certainly comes 
across as charming enough.  But I've given him a chance to show up with 
something of interest and he hasn't come through for me.  Actually that is a 
characteristic of the Batgap interviews I have listened to as well.  Optimal 
human development may either be a myth or be highly overrated. 

I'm with you on the lively engagement with the world criteria but I'm not sure 
them being "settled" has meaning or value for me.  Some of the most interesting 
people interact with are kind of nutjobs and I can only take them in small 
doses because of that.  But the way they challenge me is what I am seeking in 
interacting with them. 

I think most of the time I am seeking people out with shared interests and if 
they have a good sense of humor, and are passionate about their interests I can 
let most other well balanced traits slide. Many of the most interesting people 
for me are so hyper-focused that they lack some of the smoothness of better 
adjusted but less interesting people. (for me)  YMMV 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> laughing because I think of optimal human growth or development as a Western 
> idea rather than Eastern.  Western as in Maslow and Piaget for example, 
> though I would imagine there are other psychologists who speak of that.  
> Probably some educators too.
> 
> What happened when I was replying to your previous post about belief is that 
> I suddenly became aware of a meta belief in me:  that optimal human 
> development is always good.  Maybe similar to the Western thinking that 
> economic growth is always good no matter what the consequences are to the 
> environment.  That's partially what made me question my belief about optimal 
> human development.
> 
> So, what do I think it is?  First of all I'd say it's different for 
> different people though society may have general beliefs and guidelines.  
> And I agree with you that it's more about moving in a progressive direction 
> rather than arriving at a goal.  I also agree that a person can be 
> progressing more in one area of their life than they are in another.
> 
> 
> The people who I think of as well developed, and yes these are simply my 
> opinions, I do think of them as wel

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[navashok]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:


> As my grandmother used to say, "Be sure your sins will find you out."

I didn't know I was talking to your grandmother all the time.

  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Ann

[Share Long]

Hey Ann, I've been wanting to tell you for a few days now that I so much 
enjoyed reading this post of yours.  I just loved the feeling tone of it, very 
compassionate.  Reminded too of when you noted that everybody is soft on the 
inside (-:




 From: Ann 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 9:05 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.
 

  


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
> 
> 
> > Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> > of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> > he can in whatever way he can.
> > 
> > Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> > about it?
> 
> 
> Very funny.  Nabbie has never heard my two CDs so he is basing his opinion on 
> a few random videos on the Web. 
> 
> And of course he is welcome to not liking what I do for any reason.
> 
> I just objected to the racist term he used in his latest putdown so that was 
> what my post was about.  His previous insistence that I am not playing black 
> music but instead "hillbilly" music showed how deeply he has thought about 
> the whole thing.
> 
> He obviously does resent that I think his whole gullibility routine 
> concerning how crop circles are actually mating beds for bigfoot is very 
> silly.  Or is it aliens or Maitreya running around sideways on the ground 
> like Curly in the Three Stooges?  It is so hard to keep up with all his 
> foolishness.
> 
> It is funny that people think that saying they don't like your art is going 
> to hurt an artist. As if everyone is a pop star who needs to be "liked" by 
> millions for their income.  I just need to be liked by the person who signs 
> my check for my next gig or who buys my CDs.  That is the freedom of Indie 
> music.

Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think that others 
should criticize the art of another because of something they do not like about 
the artist unrelated to his art. I think the mere fact of making art, and music 
is definitely in this category, is something that, among other things, can 
bring out the vulnerability of someone. I believe that if one is willing to 
stand up in front of a group of one or one thousand then that person has opened 
themselves up to those people in the very act of making their art/music. I feel 
that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after Curtis, or anyone, by 
targeting what they do as their passion, as their creative thrust and as their 
"gift" to the outside world. And because of the passion and the love behind 
your desire to make and share music you obviously put yourself out there and it 
gets heard. 

No matter how much I may agree or disagree with your position on various 
subjects or how we may jibe at each other I would never attack you by 
belittling your music, Curtis. I respect you for what you do on the streets and 
in your paid gigs. It is not easy. I have seen some video of you performing and 
you are givin' 'er. You give your body and your voice and you exude the 
knowledge and love you have for your genre of music. I applaud you in this. You 
add something good to this planet with your art. When someone attacks that they 
attack some of the most sensitive part of a human being and they should have a 
care. As far as I am concerned that area of your life is off bounds unless it 
is relevant to what is being discussed or explored. 

> 
> I appreciate the intention behind your post. 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > > 
> > > Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> > > use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> > > insulting me.
> > > 
> > > > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > > > dark history of racist terms
> > > 
> > > Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> > > 
> > > > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > > > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > > > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > > > their brilliant artistic abil

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis

[curtisdeltablues]

ng between them 
> comes across to me as loving and healthy.  He works as a doctor in Paris and 
> together they are raising two daughters.  For me he is a good example of 
> optimal human development and one that I can speak of from a more direct 
> experience.  
> 
> And I also see him the way I see all of us:  a work in progress.  How about 
> you?  Is there anyone you think of as very highly developed?
> 
> 
> 
>  From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:04 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis and Xeno
>  
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Curtis this and previous posts made me realize that we all, even 
> > scientists, have meta beliefs about beliefs and these are the ones that at 
> > least need to be recognized.  Why do they need to be recognized?  
> > Well, for sure that's another belief.  It got me thinking that in 
> > Western cultures there's a deeply buried meta belief that optimal human 
> > development is always good.  In the spirit of questioning ALL beliefs, I 
> > ask: is it.  Is optimal human growth always good?  And with that we 
> > have to ask:  good for what? 
> 
> Hey Share.  I like the idea of challenging presuppositions that lie at the 
> often unconscious roots of our beliefs.  I think you would need to define 
> what you mean by "optimal human growth".  I'm not sure this concept has a 
> place in Western thought as stated. It seems more like an Eastern concept.
> 
> And if we look at it in a more limited way as growth in some specific area, 
> I'm not sure we would see that much difference between East and West. 
> Especially now that the East is appearing more and more Western in its 
> economic value system. Artists all around the world are always engaged in 
> improving their craft.  Athletes grow in skill everywhere.  Scientist try to 
> push knowledge ahead and educators help students learn more,in the East and 
> West. 
> 
> For me the concept of "optimal" human growth has the irrelevance of a concept 
> like personal salvation.  I haven't run into anyone that I would label with 
> this perfectionist standard.  The only person I ever met who tried to set 
> himself up as if he had attained such a state would be Maharishi, and I don't 
> see much evidence for term to be relevant with him.  He did laugh a lot and 
> was pretty rich.  He seemed to enjoy his job. But "optimal"?  That seem a bit 
> overstated. 
> 
> So I am left with increments of growth in different specific areas of my 
> life.  We all seem to choose our focus for growth and it seems difficult to 
> get even all the ones we choose always moving in the right direction. I know 
> people who don't exhibit much interest in growth in any area.  Their lives 
> appear passionless to me. I suspect it is a combination of nature/nurture 
> factors that makes me get out of bed and go after one dream or another. To 
> get better at any of the arts I am focusing on for example.  Optimal doesn't 
> seem too relevant to those missions.  I think of it metaphorically as if I am 
> just moving my pawns ahead each day.  That seems like enough of a goal.
> 
> Thanks for the writing prompt. 
> 
> So what does the concept of "optimal human growth" mean to you?
> 
> > 
> > Xeno, what do you think?  Are there meta beliefs?  How can they be 
> > dealt with?  And why should we even bother with that?  Thank you.  
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: curtisdeltablues 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 9:23 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> > 
> > I really appreciate what you wrote Ann.  I know you have a deep 
> > appreciation for the arts and people who try to live by their art.
> > 
> > As I'm sure you know every artist just has to follow their own inner muse.  
> > I play music the way I like it, to please my own tastes.  It can only be 
> > that way for the kind of blues I play.  So I am really not too vulnerable 
> > to anyone expressing something here.  I have put in too much time in front 
> > of people actually listening to my music without some agenda, so I know I 
> > am not the only one who hears the music as I do.  And musical taste is so 
> > personal.  I would never hold it against anyone wh

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:

> > seeing as how you've
> > posted about the Junkyard Dog site in order to win
> > an argument with Judy and Barry posted a phony photo
> > of her as well - you guys suck at debate. LoL!
> 
> That's a whole different story, it came up in the SERP's*,
> so It's different from just 'posting it as links'. It was
> a spoof about Judy's excessive use of the word 'liar'.

It was much more than that, of course--an attempt to
"get" me that went badly wrong (for both you and Barry,
who made his own stunning blooper) when you claimed I
had thought *you* were responsible for what was on 
Andrew's site. You also figured Andrew's site was new
to FFL readers and that I would be embarrassed by the
revelation. Not to mention trying to connect me with
Scientology by linking to Bernie's site.

It was hilarious. Bad enough to accuse *me* of
cyberstalking, then doing it yourself--only to make
a huge mess of it and prove yourself a liar into the
bargain.

As my grandmother used to say, "Be sure your sins will
find you out."

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis

[Share Long]

laughing because I think of optimal human growth or development as a Western 
idea rather than Eastern.  Western as in Maslow and Piaget for example, though 
I would imagine there are other psychologists who speak of that.  Probably some 
educators too.

What happened when I was replying to your previous post about belief is that I 
suddenly became aware of a meta belief in me:  that optimal human development 
is always good.  Maybe similar to the Western thinking that economic growth is 
always good no matter what the consequences are to the environment.  That's 
partially what made me question my belief about optimal human development.

So, what do I think it is?  First of all I'd say it's different for different 
people though society may have general beliefs and guidelines.  And I agree 
with you that it's more about moving in a progressive direction rather than 
arriving at a goal.  I also agree that a person can be progressing more in one 
area of their life than they are in another.


The people who I think of as well developed, and yes these are simply my 
opinions, I do think of them as well developed in the major areas of life.  
They have a way to contribute their gifts to the world.  They sustain healthy, 
loving relationships, especially with intimate partner, parents, children and 
siblings.  Well with all people, but those listed are the ones wherein our 
shadow material can hide (-:

And this is the crucial part for me:  their energy FEELS as if they are living 
in the zone most of the time.  Meaning that they are living a sustained balance 
of what I'm calling settledness and lively engagement with the world around 
them.  This is a very subjective call on my part and I recognize that I can be 
wrong.  But I'll add this to make my point:  I've only seen Mr. Girish Varma on 
tapes and live feeds.  But I have NEVER been comfortable with his energy.  

OTOH, I have been in Dr. Nader's presence a few times.  His energy to me feels 
healthy, balanced, strong and expanded.  A well developed mind with a well 
developed heart and strong connection between the two.  I've also been at 
celebrations where his wife has been present and the feeling between them comes 
across to me as loving and healthy.  He works as a doctor in Paris and together 
they are raising two daughters.  For me he is a good example of optimal human 
development and one that I can speak of from a more direct experience.  

And I also see him the way I see all of us:  a work in progress.  How about 
you?  Is there anyone you think of as very highly developed?



 From: curtisdeltablues 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:04 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis and Xeno
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Curtis this and previous posts made me realize that we all, even scientists, 
> have meta beliefs about beliefs and these are the ones that at least need to 
> be recognized.  Why do they need to be recognized?  Well, for sure that's 
> another belief.  It got me thinking that in Western cultures there's a 
> deeply buried meta belief that optimal human development is always good.  In 
> the spirit of questioning ALL beliefs, I ask: is it.  Is optimal human 
> growth always good?  And with that we have to ask:  good for what? 

Hey Share.  I like the idea of challenging presuppositions that lie at the 
often unconscious roots of our beliefs.  I think you would need to define what 
you mean by "optimal human growth".  I'm not sure this concept has a place in 
Western thought as stated. It seems more like an Eastern concept.

And if we look at it in a more limited way as growth in some specific area, I'm 
not sure we would see that much difference between East and West. Especially 
now that the East is appearing more and more Western in its economic value 
system. Artists all around the world are always engaged in improving their 
craft.  Athletes grow in skill everywhere.  Scientist try to push knowledge 
ahead and educators help students learn more,in the East and West. 

For me the concept of "optimal" human growth has the irrelevance of a concept 
like personal salvation.  I haven't run into anyone that I would label with 
this perfectionist standard.  The only person I ever met who tried to set 
himself up as if he had attained such a state would be Maharishi, and I don't 
see much evidence for term to be relevant with him.  He did laugh a lot and was 
pretty rich.  He seemed to enjoy his job. But "optimal"?  That seem a bit 
overstated. 

So I am left with increments of growth in different specific areas of my life.  
We all seem to choose our focus for growth and it seems difficult to get even 
all the ones we choose always moving in the right direction. I know people

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[navashok]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > > > > Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> > > > > I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> > > > > *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower.
> > > > >
> > > > How much I can relate to this. And once you had the 
> > > > shower, you don't feel like jumping back into the 
> > > > ditch right away.
> > > >
> > > There's a difference? Go figure.
> > >
> navashok:
> > Well, some say (not me), you live under a bridge...
> >
> That's low, but not unexpected, 

Sorry Richie, I didn't mean to insult you. No, you don't live under a bridge, I 
just didn't get what you were trying to say.

> seeing as how you've
> posted about the Junkyard Dog site in order to win
> an argument with Judy and Barry posted a phony photo
> of her as well - you guys suck at debate. LoL!

That's a whole different story, it came up in the SERP's*, so It's different 
from just 'posting it as links'. It was a spoof about Judy's excessive use of 
the word 'liar'.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_results_page

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Richard J. Williams]

> > > > Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> > > > I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> > > > *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower.
> > > >
> > > How much I can relate to this. And once you had the 
> > > shower, you don't feel like jumping back into the 
> > > ditch right away.
> > >
> > There's a difference? Go figure.
> >
navashok:
> Well, some say (not me), you live under a bridge...
>
That's low, but not unexpected, seeing as how you've
posted about the Junkyard Dog site in order to win
an argument with Judy and Barry posted a phony photo
of her as well - you guys suck at debate. LoL!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[navashok]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > > Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> > > I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> > > *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower.
> > >
> navashok:
> > How much I can relate to this. And once you had the 
> > shower, you don't feel like jumping back into the 
> > ditch right away.
> >
> There's a difference? Go figure.

Well, some say (not me), you live under a bridge...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Richard J. Williams]

> > Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> > I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> > *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower.
> >
navashok:
> How much I can relate to this. And once you had the 
> shower, you don't feel like jumping back into the 
> ditch right away.
>
There's a difference? Go figure.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[navashok]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
 
> Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower.

How much I can relate to this. And once you had the shower, you don't feel like 
jumping back into the ditch right away.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Xeno

[Share Long]

But Xeno that's what I mean by a meta belief:  you believe that it's important 
to find a way to see through beliefs.  Anyway, thanks for the NIH article.  Of 
course I wondered what would happen if the subject were experiencing the deep 
rest of TM (-:

A Buddhist by the name of Tara Bennett Goleman compares neural pathways to ruts 
in a dirt road.  The more you go down them, the more likely you are to go down 
them the next time.  Conversely, when breaking a habit for example, it only 
takes one time of doing a different behavior and a new pathway is strengthened.

I think people feel safer when they feel that their belief is right, that their 
scheme is an accurate map of reality, etc.  


Once I said something about survival value to a teacher.  He said, "We're not 
here to survive."  That was a mind stopping koan for sure!    




 From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 2:08 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis and Xeno
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Curtis this and previous posts made me realize that we all, even scientists, 
> have meta beliefs about beliefs and these are the ones that at least need to 
> be recognized.  Why do they need to be recognized?  Well, for sure that's 
> another belief.  It got me thinking that in Western cultures there's a 
> deeply buried meta belief that optimal human development is always good.  In 
> the spirit of questioning ALL beliefs, I ask: is it.  Is optimal human 
> growth always good?  And with that we have to ask:  good for what? 
> 
> Xeno, what do you think?  Are there meta beliefs?  How can they be dealt 
> with?  And why should we even bother with that?  Thank you.   
> 
We are saddled with beliefs from our parents, our culture, beliefs that result 
from mistaken interpretation of experiences. All these beliefs entangle with 
each other. There are lots of beliefs, how you catagorise them and put them in 
relationships, put them in levels, probably is not nearly as important as 
finding a way to see through them.

Input from the senses is raw, but it is not necessarily reliable as signal 
processing goes on and re-patterns it, throws away some of it, even before it 
gets to the brain. This is a distortion that we cannot undo. But the mind, 
which is basically another form that consciousness takes, is not direct at all, 
it is a running commentary on the rest, attempting to organise all that 
information in some kind of useful way. Because it is indirect, it is at least 
one step away from whatever 'truth' might be. The simple observation that very 
few people fundamentally agree about anything seems to show the mind is not a 
source of truth.

There was a recent paper from the National Institutes of Health. The authors 
were dealing with rats (an appropriate model for us here on FFL). Neurons that 
store information, during a state of rest, reverse the electrical flow, 
basically erasing some of the state previously encoded in the neuron. This is 
why we forget. However if a similar pattern is experienced next, the partly 
erased neurons seem primed to make an even stronger connexion the second time 
around, and subsequent times. This may have to do with why certain kinds of 
repetitive and intense experiences like PTSD get locked into the system. This 
might have something to do with why beliefs get locked into our systems.

http://www.nichd.nih.gov/news/releases/Pages/031813-backwards-neurons.aspx

Why is it they everyone, me included, thinks that what they believe is correct, 
and what others believe is usually wrong? Taking all of us in concert, it 
should be obvious that this could not possibly be correct. How often are we 
really right about anything?

> 
>  From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 9:23 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.
> 
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> 
> I really appreciate what you wrote Ann.  I know you have a deep appreciation 
> for the arts and people who try to live by their art.
> 
> As I'm sure you know every artist just has to follow their own inner muse.  I 
> play music the way I like it, to please my own tastes.  It can only be that 
> way for the kind of blues I play.  So I am really not too vulnerable to 
> anyone expressing something here.  I have put in too much time in front of 
> people actually listening to my music without some agenda, so I know I am not 
> the only one who hears the music as I do.  And musical taste is so personal.  
> I would never hold it against anyone who hated my musical style.  There are 
> some I don't like.
> 
> An

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis and Xeno

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Curtis this and previous posts made me realize that we all, even scientists, 
> have meta beliefs about beliefs and these are the ones that at least need to 
> be recognized.  Why do they need to be recognized?  Well, for sure that's 
> another belief.  It got me thinking that in Western cultures there's a 
> deeply buried meta belief that optimal human development is always good.  In 
> the spirit of questioning ALL beliefs, I ask: is it.  Is optimal human 
> growth always good?  And with that we have to ask:  good for what? 

Hey Share.  I like the idea of challenging presuppositions that lie at the 
often unconscious roots of our beliefs.  I think you would need to define what 
you mean by "optimal human growth".  I'm not sure this concept has a place in 
Western thought as stated. It seems more like an Eastern concept.

And if we look at it in a more limited way as growth in some specific area, I'm 
not sure we would see that much difference between East and West. Especially 
now that the East is appearing more and more Western in its economic value 
system. Artists all around the world are always engaged in improving their 
craft.  Athletes grow in skill everywhere.  Scientist try to push knowledge 
ahead and educators help students learn more,in the East and West.   

For me the concept of "optimal" human growth has the irrelevance of a concept 
like personal salvation.  I haven't run into anyone that I would label with 
this perfectionist standard.  The only person I ever met who tried to set 
himself up as if he had attained such a state would be Maharishi, and I don't 
see much evidence for term to be relevant with him.  He did laugh a lot and was 
pretty rich.  He seemed to enjoy his job. But "optimal"?  That seem a bit 
overstated. 

So I am left with increments of growth in different specific areas of my life.  
We all seem to choose our focus for growth and it seems difficult to get even 
all the ones we choose always moving in the right direction. I know people who 
don't exhibit much interest in growth in any area.  Their lives appear 
passionless to me. I suspect it is a combination of nature/nurture factors that 
makes me get out of bed and go after one dream or another. To get better at any 
of the arts I am focusing on for example.  Optimal doesn't seem too relevant to 
those missions.  I think of it metaphorically as if I am just moving my pawns 
ahead each day.  That seems like enough of a goal.

Thanks for the writing prompt. 

So what does the concept of "optimal human growth" mean to you?



> 
> Xeno, what do you think?  Are there meta beliefs?  How can they be dealt 
> with?  And why should we even bother with that?  Thank you.   
> 
> 
> 
> ____
>  From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 9:23 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.
>  
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> 
> I really appreciate what you wrote Ann.  I know you have a deep appreciation 
> for the arts and people who try to live by their art.
> 
> As I'm sure you know every artist just has to follow their own inner muse.  I 
> play music the way I like it, to please my own tastes.  It can only be that 
> way for the kind of blues I play.  So I am really not too vulnerable to 
> anyone expressing something here.  I have put in too much time in front of 
> people actually listening to my music without some agenda, so I know I am not 
> the only one who hears the music as I do.  And musical taste is so personal.  
> I would never hold it against anyone who hated my musical style.  There are 
> some I don't like.
> 
> And it is the same with philosophy.  I don't care if someone doesn't share my 
> beliefs or lack of beliefs here.  I seek out people who see the world 
> differently.  Good intellectual boundaries means that I can accept that we 
> can agree to disagree about our beliefs and not feel threatened if someone 
> thinks I am crazy for my choices. 
> 
> Your points wer a sensitive ones and it was very cool of you to lay it out in 
> such detail.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> > > > of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> > > > he can in whatever way he can.
> > > &g

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis and Xeno

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Curtis this and previous posts made me realize that we all, even scientists, 
> have meta beliefs about beliefs and these are the ones that at least need to 
> be recognized.  Why do they need to be recognized?  Well, for sure that's 
> another belief.  It got me thinking that in Western cultures there's a 
> deeply buried meta belief that optimal human development is always good.  In 
> the spirit of questioning ALL beliefs, I ask: is it.  Is optimal human 
> growth always good?  And with that we have to ask:  good for what? 
> 
> Xeno, what do you think?  Are there meta beliefs?  How can they be dealt 
> with?  And why should we even bother with that?  Thank you.   
> 
We are saddled with beliefs from our parents, our culture, beliefs that result 
from mistaken interpretation of experiences. All these beliefs entangle with 
each other. There are lots of beliefs, how you catagorise them and put them in 
relationships, put them in levels, probably is not nearly as important as 
finding a way to see through them.

Input from the senses is raw, but it is not necessarily reliable as signal 
processing goes on and re-patterns it, throws away some of it, even before it 
gets to the brain. This is a distortion that we cannot undo. But the mind, 
which is basically another form that consciousness takes, is not direct at all, 
it is a running commentary on the rest, attempting to organise all that 
information in some kind of useful way. Because it is indirect, it is at least 
one step away from whatever 'truth' might be. The simple observation that very 
few people fundamentally agree about anything seems to show the mind is not a 
source of truth.

There was a recent paper from the National Institutes of Health. The authors 
were dealing with rats (an appropriate model for us here on FFL). Neurons that 
store information, during a state of rest, reverse the electrical flow, 
basically erasing some of the state previously encoded in the neuron. This is 
why we forget. However if a similar pattern is experienced next, the partly 
erased neurons seem primed to make an even stronger connexion the second time 
around, and subsequent times. This may have to do with why certain kinds of 
repetitive and intense experiences like PTSD get locked into the system. This 
might have something to do with why beliefs get locked into our systems.

http://www.nichd.nih.gov/news/releases/Pages/031813-backwards-neurons.aspx

Why is it they everyone, me included, thinks that what they believe is correct, 
and what others believe is usually wrong? Taking all of us in concert, it 
should be obvious that this could not possibly be correct. How often are we 
really right about anything?

> 
>  From: curtisdeltablues 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 9:23 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.
>  
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> 
> I really appreciate what you wrote Ann.  I know you have a deep appreciation 
> for the arts and people who try to live by their art.
> 
> As I'm sure you know every artist just has to follow their own inner muse.  I 
> play music the way I like it, to please my own tastes.  It can only be that 
> way for the kind of blues I play.  So I am really not too vulnerable to 
> anyone expressing something here.  I have put in too much time in front of 
> people actually listening to my music without some agenda, so I know I am not 
> the only one who hears the music as I do.  And musical taste is so personal.  
> I would never hold it against anyone who hated my musical style.  There are 
> some I don't like.
> 
> And it is the same with philosophy.  I don't care if someone doesn't share my 
> beliefs or lack of beliefs here.  I seek out people who see the world 
> differently.  Good intellectual boundaries means that I can accept that we 
> can agree to disagree about our beliefs and not feel threatened if someone 
> thinks I am crazy for my choices. 
> 
> Your points wer a sensitive ones and it was very cool of you to lay it out in 
> such detail.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> > > > of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> > > > he can in whatever way he can.
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues. to Curtis and Xeno

[Share Long]

Curtis this and previous posts made me realize that we all, even scientists, 
have meta beliefs about beliefs and these are the ones that at least need to be 
recognized.  Why do they need to be recognized?  Well, for sure that's another 
belief.  It got me thinking that in Western cultures there's a deeply buried 
meta belief that optimal human development is always good.  In the spirit of 
questioning ALL beliefs, I ask: is it.  Is optimal human growth always good?  
And with that we have to ask:  good for what? 

Xeno, what do you think?  Are there meta beliefs?  How can they be dealt with?  
And why should we even bother with that?  Thank you.   




 From: curtisdeltablues 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 9:23 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:

I really appreciate what you wrote Ann.  I know you have a deep appreciation 
for the arts and people who try to live by their art.

As I'm sure you know every artist just has to follow their own inner muse.  I 
play music the way I like it, to please my own tastes.  It can only be that way 
for the kind of blues I play.  So I am really not too vulnerable to anyone 
expressing something here.  I have put in too much time in front of people 
actually listening to my music without some agenda, so I know I am not the only 
one who hears the music as I do.  And musical taste is so personal.  I would 
never hold it against anyone who hated my musical style.  There are some I 
don't like.

And it is the same with philosophy.  I don't care if someone doesn't share my 
beliefs or lack of beliefs here.  I seek out people who see the world 
differently.  Good intellectual boundaries means that I can accept that we can 
agree to disagree about our beliefs and not feel threatened if someone thinks I 
am crazy for my choices. 

Your points wer a sensitive ones and it was very cool of you to lay it out in 
such detail.

Thanks.

>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> > > of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> > > he can in whatever way he can.
> > > 
> > > Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> > > about it?
> > 
> > 
> > Very funny.  Nabbie has never heard my two CDs so he is basing his opinion 
> > on a few random videos on the Web. 
> > 
> > And of course he is welcome to not liking what I do for any reason.
> > 
> > I just objected to the racist term he used in his latest putdown so that 
> > was what my post was about.  His previous insistence that I am not playing 
> > black music but instead "hillbilly" music showed how deeply he has thought 
> > about the whole thing.
> > 
> > He obviously does resent that I think his whole gullibility routine 
> > concerning how crop circles are actually mating beds for bigfoot is very 
> > silly.  Or is it aliens or Maitreya running around sideways on the ground 
> > like Curly in the Three Stooges?  It is so hard to keep up with all his 
> > foolishness.
> > 
> > It is funny that people think that saying they don't like your art is going 
> > to hurt an artist. As if everyone is a pop star who needs to be "liked" by 
> > millions for their income.  I just need to be liked by the person who signs 
> > my check for my next gig or who buys my CDs.  That is the freedom of Indie 
> > music.
> 
> Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think that others 
> should criticize the art of another because of something they do not like 
> about the artist unrelated to his art. I think the mere fact of making art, 
> and music is definitely in this category, is something that, among other 
> things, can bring out the vulnerability of someone. I believe that if one is 
> willing to stand up in front of a group of one or one thousand then that 
> person has opened themselves up to those people in the very act of making 
> their art/music. I feel that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after 
> Curtis, or anyone, by targeting what they do as their passion, as their 
> creative thrust and as their "gift" to the outside world. And because of the 
> passion and the love behind your desire to make and share music you obviously 
> put yourself out there and it gets heard. 
> 
> No matter how much I may agree or disagree with your position on various 
> subjects o

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[salyavin808]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > > 
> > > Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> > > use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> > > insulting me.
> > > 
> > > > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > > > dark history of racist terms
> > > 
> > > Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> > > 
> > > > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > > > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > > > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > > > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > > > common to all races.
> > > 
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> > > 
> > > > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > > > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > > > are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> > > > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > > > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > > > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> > > 
> > > Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> > > very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> > > the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> > > 
> > > Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> > > Nabby was saying:
> > > 
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> > > 
> > > So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
> > > you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
> > > *do* meet the standard?
> > 
> > Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> > of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> > he can in whatever way he can.
> 
> That's not an "or," it's an "and."
> 
> > Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> > about it?
> 
> I don't think Curtis has ever implicitly accused Nabby of
> being a racist for using the term "hillbilly." Perhaps I
> missed something?

Huh? 
 
> Or perhaps you read something into my post that wasn't
> there?

Ditto.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think that 
> > others should criticize the art of another because of something they do not 
> > like about the artist unrelated to his art.
> 
> 
> 
> This is getting really, really boring, what "art" are you reffering to ?

Art as an expression of inner passion, inner feeling and the external 
expression of creativity, energy as a result.
> 
>  I think the mere fact of making art, and music is definitely in this 
> category, is something that, among other things, can bring out the 
> vulnerability of someone. I believe that if one is willing to stand up in 
> front of a group of one or one thousand then that person has opened 
> themselves up to those people in the very act of making their art/music. 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is that anyone who enters a podium is an artist. Have you 
> even considered what you are saying or are you just saying something because 
> you are bored ?

Nabby, get a grip. Read it again and try and separate yourself from your 
bruised ego, go past your self interest and read what I wrote. Make a 
distinction, somehow, between how much you dislike Curtis and what I actually 
said. Try and be OBJECTIVE. If it helps, forget about Curtis, then take baby 
steps backwards.
> 
> 
> I feel that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after Curtis, or anyone, by 
> targeting what they do as their passion, as their creative thrust and as 
> their "gift" to the outside world.
> 
> 
> Some might want to avoid that sort of "gifts" of noise that attacs you when 
> peacefully walking down a street in say, New Orleans.

I can't imagine New Orleans is on your itinerary of places to visit within the 
next 50 years so you should be fine. Dislike his music all you want but 
consider what this says about you that you attack his art in order to "get" 
him. 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[seventhray27]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 
wrote:

> I'm out of this discussion.
>
Amen

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[seventhray27]

Nabs,

You just can't give an inch can you?  Your hatred must run so deep that,
for example, you can find so much to admire about David Lynch's art, and
so much to despise about Curtis'

On the other hand Nabs, you didn't have much credibility to lose, so I
guess it evens out.

Really, I don't love you like a brother.  At least not right now. Sorry.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" awoelflebater@ wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think
that others should criticize the art of another because of something
they do not like about the artist unrelated to his art.
>
>
>
> This is getting really, really boring, what "art" are you reffering to
?
>
> I think the mere fact of making art, and music is definitely in this
category, is something that, among other things, can bring out the
vulnerability of someone. I believe that if one is willing to stand up
in front of a group of one or one thousand then that person has opened
themselves up to those people in the very act of making their art/music.
>
>
> What you are saying is that anyone who enters a podium is an artist.
Have you even considered what you are saying or are you just saying
something because you are bored ?
>
>
> I feel that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after Curtis, or
anyone, by targeting what they do as their passion, as their creative
thrust and as their "gift" to the outside world.
>
>
> Some might want to avoid that sort of "gifts" of noise that attacs you
when peacefully walking down a street in say, New Orleans.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Buck]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote:
>
>
> 
> And BTW, the only person that I'm aware of on this list, if I'm not mixing up 
> names, that has ever been closely around real musical artists for prologed 
> periods of time, and has a deeper knowledge of music than most others here 
> because he actually has a "ear", in stark contrast to certain others...
> I'm out of this discussion.
>

Well, I for one have had piano lessons from a Prussian maestro of extreme 
respect of the kind that is given to master musicians and I should have been a 
true proficient had I only practiced more. 

And I for one respect a lot the blues of Curtis. I look forward to hearing him 
someday in live performance in the concert hall or on the street doing the 
authentic thing. 
Om, 
Buck on the Range 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think that 
> > others should criticize the art of another because of something they do not 
> > like about the artist unrelated to his art.
> 
> 
> 
> This is getting really, really boring, what "art" are you reffering to ?
> 
>  I think the mere fact of making art, and music is definitely in this 
> category, is something that, among other things, can bring out the 
> vulnerability of someone. I believe that if one is willing to stand up in 
> front of a group of one or one thousand then that person has opened 
> themselves up to those people in the very act of making their art/music. 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is that anyone who enters a podium is an artist. Have you 
> even considered what you are saying or are you just saying something because 
> you are bored ?
> 
> 
> I feel that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after Curtis, or anyone, by 
> targeting what they do as their passion, as their creative thrust and as 
> their "gift" to the outside world.
> 
> 
> Some might want to avoid that sort of "gifts" of noise that attacs you when 
> peacefully walking down a street in say, New Orleans.


And BTW, the only person that I'm aware of on this list, if I'm not mixing up 
names, that has ever been closely around real musical artists for prologed 
periods of time, and has a deeper knowledge of music than most others here 
because he actually has a "ear", in stark contrast to certain others that claim 
to be artists and/or philosophers however amateurish, is Bhairitu. Let him be 
the jugde by listening to what I consider noise that Curtis has posted on 
youtube as "curtisdeltablues".  If he so wishes. But don't say later you were 
not warned :-) 

I'm out of this discussion. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[doctordumbass]

You don't have the hang of it, by a looong shot. I was responding to what 
Ravi said about Curtis, only - I should have shortened Ravi's quote to the part 
I was specifically commenting on, as I have below. Hadn't read the thread until 
then.

Ravi: ...he [Curtis] is too wrapped up in his
 self-righteousness to notice how it masquerades
 his own fears and insecurities.

Me: Bullseye.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:


> 
> Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think that others 
> should criticize the art of another because of something they do not like 
> about the artist unrelated to his art.



This is getting really, really boring, what "art" are you reffering to ?

 I think the mere fact of making art, and music is definitely in this category, 
is something that, among other things, can bring out the vulnerability of 
someone. I believe that if one is willing to stand up in front of a group of 
one or one thousand then that person has opened themselves up to those people 
in the very act of making their art/music. 


What you are saying is that anyone who enters a podium is an artist. Have you 
even considered what you are saying or are you just saying something because 
you are bored ?


I feel that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after Curtis, or anyone, by 
targeting what they do as their passion, as their creative thrust and as their 
"gift" to the outside world.


Some might want to avoid that sort of "gifts" of noise that attacs you when 
peacefully walking down a street in say, New Orleans. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:

I really appreciate what you wrote Ann.  I know you have a deep appreciation 
for the arts and people who try to live by their art.

As I'm sure you know every artist just has to follow their own inner muse.  I 
play music the way I like it, to please my own tastes.  It can only be that way 
for the kind of blues I play.  So I am really not too vulnerable to anyone 
expressing something here.  I have put in too much time in front of people 
actually listening to my music without some agenda, so I know I am not the only 
one who hears the music as I do.  And musical taste is so personal.  I would 
never hold it against anyone who hated my musical style.  There are some I 
don't like.

And it is the same with philosophy.  I don't care if someone doesn't share my 
beliefs or lack of beliefs here.  I seek out people who see the world 
differently.  Good intellectual boundaries means that I can accept that we can 
agree to disagree about our beliefs and not feel threatened if someone thinks I 
am crazy for my choices.  

Your points wer a sensitive ones and it was very cool of you to lay it out in 
such detail.

Thanks.



 


>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> > > of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> > > he can in whatever way he can.
> > > 
> > > Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> > > about it?
> > 
> > 
> > Very funny.  Nabbie has never heard my two CDs so he is basing his opinion 
> > on a few random videos on the Web. 
> > 
> > And of course he is welcome to not liking what I do for any reason.
> > 
> > I just objected to the racist term he used in his latest putdown so that 
> > was what my post was about.  His previous insistence that I am not playing 
> > black music but instead "hillbilly" music showed how deeply he has thought 
> > about the whole thing.
> > 
> > He obviously does resent that I think his whole gullibility routine 
> > concerning how crop circles are actually mating beds for bigfoot is very 
> > silly.  Or is it aliens or Maitreya running around sideways on the ground 
> > like Curly in the Three Stooges?  It is so hard to keep up with all his 
> > foolishness.
> > 
> > It is funny that people think that saying they don't like your art is going 
> > to hurt an artist. As if everyone is a pop star who needs to be "liked" by 
> > millions for their income.  I just need to be liked by the person who signs 
> > my check for my next gig or who buys my CDs.  That is the freedom of Indie 
> > music.
> 
> Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think that others 
> should criticize the art of another because of something they do not like 
> about the artist unrelated to his art. I think the mere fact of making art, 
> and music is definitely in this category, is something that, among other 
> things, can bring out the vulnerability of someone. I believe that if one is 
> willing to stand up in front of a group of one or one thousand then that 
> person has opened themselves up to those people in the very act of making 
> their art/music. I feel that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after 
> Curtis, or anyone, by targeting what they do as their passion, as their 
> creative thrust and as their "gift" to the outside world. And because of the 
> passion and the love behind your desire to make and share music you obviously 
> put yourself out there and it gets heard. 
> 
> No matter how much I may agree or disagree with your position on various 
> subjects or how we may jibe at each other I would never attack you by 
> belittling your music, Curtis. I respect you for what you do on the streets 
> and in your paid gigs. It is not easy. I have seen some video of you 
> performing and you are givin' 'er. You give your body and your voice and you 
> exude the knowledge and love you have for your genre of music. I applaud you 
> in this. You add something good to this planet with your art. When someone 
> attacks that they attack some of the most sensitive part of a human being and 
> they should have a care. As far as I am concerned that area of your life is 
> off bounds unless it is relevant to what is being discussed or explored. 
> 
> 
> > 
> > I appreciate the intention behind your post. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > > > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > > > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > > > 
> > > > Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> > > > use to get back at you

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[doctordumbass]

The extreme parallel was between your acceptance of Barry's behavior and the 
acceptance of the German people, *during* the Holocaust - otherwise the extreme 
parallel doesn't make sense. Just wanted to get your attention, kinda like the 
way you and everybody else does around here. No need to get your panties in a 
twist about it Curtis. We used to call that being able to dish it out, but 
can't take it.  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> (snip)
> > Or you could go with a Judy approved Jim's technique of
> > including the phrase "this is an extreme example" before
> > you compare someone's actions here with the Holocaust.
> > (Remember when he compared me not scolding you with
> > people keeping silent about Hitler's murdering of the
> > Jews among others?)
> 
> "Judy approved"--interesting. Here's that little exchange
> between Curtis and me:
> 
> -
> Curtis:
> > Hey did you think that comparing me not scolding people
> > Jim doesn't like here on FFL to the German's attitude
> > before the Holocaust was cool? Did you jump on Jim for
> > this idiotic, odious comparison?
> 
> Judy:
> He noted that it was an extreme parallel. If he hadn't,
> I would have.
> -
> 
> One of the ways Curtis deviously shifts context is to
> disallow shades of gray and nuance.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > 
> > Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> > use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> > insulting me.
> > 
> > > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > > dark history of racist terms
> > 
> > Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> > 
> > > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > > common to all races.
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> > 
> > > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > > are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> > > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> > 
> > Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> > very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> > the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> > 
> > Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> > Nabby was saying:
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> > 
> > So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
> > you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
> > *do* meet the standard?
> 
> Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> he can in whatever way he can.

That's not an "or," it's an "and."

> Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> about it?

I don't think Curtis has ever implicitly accused Nabby of
being a racist for using the term "hillbilly." Perhaps I
missed something?

Or perhaps you read something into my post that wasn't
there?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mar 18, 2013, at 1:36 PM, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > (snip)
> > > > > > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > > > > > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > > > > > only made 50 posts. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot
> > > > > involving unfairness to the whole group which is only
> > > > > protected by Judy's vigilance. It couldn't be the
> > > > > correction of a simple mistake.
> > > > 
> > > > Usually (as Curtis knows) Alex lets us know if there
> > > > has been a mistake, especially when the mistake has
> > > > put a poster at over 50 and Alex has previously
> > > > announced that they'll be out for the next week.
> > > > 
> > > > Also note my wording, ignored by Curtis:
> > > > 
> > > > "Has Curtis received some special dispensation, *or what*?"
> > > > (emphasis added)
> > > 
> > > Indeed totally twisting and manipulating your 
> > > simple question and attaching some kind of 
> > > malevolent intention to it. Will Curtis apologize? 
> > > I don't think so - he is too wrapped up in his 
> > > self-righteousness to notice how it masquerades 
> > > his own fears and insecurities.
> > 
> > Bullseye.
> 
> Yeah, right. Judy had NO malevolent intent whatsoever
> by questioning Alex about Curtis' presence this week.
> You seem to have fallen for one of her tricks, which
> is to phrase slams in such a way that she can deny
> later that she slammed the person.
> 
> Here, let me see if I've got the hang of it:
> 
> "Boy, Judy sure is crazy lately. I am sure everyone 
> here joins me in hoping that her editing clients 
> don't do a Google search on her name, discover that 
> she's not only batshit crazy but a vindictive harpy
> as well, and find someone else to send their 
> manuscripts to. NONE of us here wants that."
> 
> There. Using Judy's "out," I meant NOTHING malevolent
> by that statement. Doncha see? I said that I hope the
> thing I mentioned *doesn't* happen, and I even said
> that almost everyone here *also* hopes that it doesn't
> happen. So if Judy is off the hook for fantasizing 
> about me getting fired (that's SO not going to happen)
> then I'm off the hook for writing what I did above.
> 
> When are you people going to stop falling for this
> bullshit? Judy fantasizes about the things she *wants*
> to happen to the people she hates, but does it in such
> a way that she can deny having done it later. See below:
> 
> > Wow. Barry *really* got his buttons pushed. It sure
> > doesn't take much to drive him over the edge into
> > paranoid hysterical raving these days.
> > 
> > He must be nervous about this Paris gig. I hope his
> > new colleagues are quick to realize he has no sense
> > of humor about himself and takes being laughed at as
> > a deadly serious insult. We definitely do not want
> > him to blow up at them, get fired, and have to slink
> > back to Holland in disgrace. He's unpleasant enough
> > when he's pleased with himself.
> 
> What a cunt. (I meant that one.)

I see living in the majestic and amazing city of Paris has not made you either 
a happy or generous man. But then, external things never can.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[doctordumbass]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is 
> > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.  
> > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > 
> > Thanks for the rap, and for forwarding Marek's.
> > 
> > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > only made 50 posts. 
> > 
> > Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> > I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> > *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower. More
> > fun to hang out in cafes and museums and music joints.
> 
> Wow, you've done a lot since getting there 24 hours ago - all those museum, 
> cafe and music joint visits already under your belt. You even posted twice to 
> FFL last night from Paris so I'm not sure what you mean by "avoiding it" if 
> putting in an honest day's work at your new job is "avoiding" FFL (after 
> posting on St Paddy's Day). But, by gum, we're glad to have you back now!
> >
>
Um, just so you know, Barry conveniently omitted earlier that his bootleg Free 
Man In Paris 1.x software crashed, and he's having to wing it now, sometimes 
exaggerating mightily to fill in the blanks.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
> 
> 
> > Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> > of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> > he can in whatever way he can.
> > 
> > Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> > about it?
> 
> 
> Very funny.  Nabbie has never heard my two CDs so he is basing his opinion on 
> a few random videos on the Web. 
> 
> And of course he is welcome to not liking what I do for any reason.
> 
> I just objected to the racist term he used in his latest putdown so that was 
> what my post was about.  His previous insistence that I am not playing black 
> music but instead "hillbilly" music showed how deeply he has thought about 
> the whole thing.
> 
> He obviously does resent that I think his whole gullibility routine 
> concerning how crop circles are actually mating beds for bigfoot is very 
> silly.  Or is it aliens or Maitreya running around sideways on the ground 
> like Curly in the Three Stooges?  It is so hard to keep up with all his 
> foolishness.
> 
> It is funny that people think that saying they don't like your art is going 
> to hurt an artist. As if everyone is a pop star who needs to be "liked" by 
> millions for their income.  I just need to be liked by the person who signs 
> my check for my next gig or who buys my CDs.  That is the freedom of Indie 
> music.

Well, I would like to say a couple of things here. I do not think that others 
should criticize the art of another because of something they do not like about 
the artist unrelated to his art. I think the mere fact of making art, and music 
is definitely in this category, is something that, among other things, can 
bring out the vulnerability of someone. I believe that if one is willing to 
stand up in front of a group of one or one thousand then that person has opened 
themselves up to those people in the very act of making their art/music. I feel 
that it is a very poorly-aimed punch to go after Curtis, or anyone, by 
targeting what they do as their passion, as their creative thrust and as their 
"gift" to the outside world. And because of the passion and the love behind 
your desire to make and share music you obviously put yourself out there and it 
gets heard. 

No matter how much I may agree or disagree with your position on various 
subjects or how we may jibe at each other I would never attack you by 
belittling your music, Curtis. I respect you for what you do on the streets and 
in your paid gigs. It is not easy. I have seen some video of you performing and 
you are givin' 'er. You give your body and your voice and you exude the 
knowledge and love you have for your genre of music. I applaud you in this. You 
add something good to this planet with your art. When someone attacks that they 
attack some of the most sensitive part of a human being and they should have a 
care. As far as I am concerned that area of your life is off bounds unless it 
is relevant to what is being discussed or explored. 


> 
> I appreciate the intention behind your post. 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > > 
> > > Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> > > use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> > > insulting me.
> > > 
> > > > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > > > dark history of racist terms
> > > 
> > > Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> > > 
> > > > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > > > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > > > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > > > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > > > common to all races.
> > > 
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> > > 
> > > > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > > > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > > > are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> > > > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > > > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > > > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> > > 
> > > Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> > > very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> > > the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> > > 
> > > Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> > > Nabby was saying:
> > > 
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> > > 
> > > So how about it, Nabby, are there some white per

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is 
> > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.  
> > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> 
> Thanks for the rap, and for forwarding Marek's.
> 
> And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> only made 50 posts. 
> 
> Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower. More
> fun to hang out in cafes and museums and music joints.

Wow, you've done a lot since getting there 24 hours ago - all those museum, 
cafe and music joint visits already under your belt. You even posted twice to 
FFL last night from Paris so I'm not sure what you mean by "avoiding it" if 
putting in an honest day's work at your new job is "avoiding" FFL (after 
posting on St Paddy's Day). But, by gum, we're glad to have you back now!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> curtisdeltablues:
> > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a 
> > long dark history of racist terms disparages not 
> > only black people, but the whole human endeavor of 
> > the arts...
> >
> You're getting way too serious - spoiling all jokes 
> you've posted about the Hindus. LoL!

Can't deny that you have a point Richard.

> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/186237

Thanks for the mammaries.  



>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
(snip)
> Or you could go with a Judy approved Jim's technique of
> including the phrase "this is an extreme example" before
> you compare someone's actions here with the Holocaust.
> (Remember when he compared me not scolding you with
> people keeping silent about Hitler's murdering of the
> Jews among others?)

"Judy approved"--interesting. Here's that little exchange
between Curtis and me:

-
Curtis:
> Hey did you think that comparing me not scolding people
> Jim doesn't like here on FFL to the German's attitude
> before the Holocaust was cool? Did you jump on Jim for
> this idiotic, odious comparison?

Judy:
He noted that it was an extreme parallel. If he hadn't,
I would have.
-

One of the ways Curtis deviously shifts context is to
disallow shades of gray and nuance.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Richard J. Williams]

curtisdeltablues:
> Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a 
> long dark history of racist terms disparages not 
> only black people, but the whole human endeavor of 
> the arts...
>
You're getting way too serious - spoiling all jokes 
you've posted about the Hindus. LoL!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/186237

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
(snip)
> Yeah, right. Judy had NO malevolent intent whatsoever
> by questioning Alex about Curtis' presence this week.
(snip)
>
> > Wow. Barry *really* got his buttons pushed. It sure
> > doesn't take much to drive him over the edge into
> > paranoid hysterical raving these days.
> > 
> > He must be nervous about this Paris gig. I hope his
> > new colleagues are quick to realize he has no sense
> > of humor about himself and takes being laughed at as
> > a deadly serious insult. We definitely do not want
> > him to blow up at them, get fired, and have to slink
> > back to Holland in disgrace. He's unpleasant enough
> > when he's pleased with himself.
> 
> What a cunt. (I meant that one.)

Can't resist. Here's the post of Barry's I was responding
to (speaking of, you know, malevolence):

-
I find it difficult to believe that anyone can see the
events of the last few days on FFL as anything other than
the same people repeating the same things they've done
for years.

First, Judy attempts to lure Curtis into one of her long,
"I win by definition" arguments by *appearing* to ask
reasonable questions. Then Curtis falls for it, and tries
his best to address her questions, while respecting the
fact that she sees things that way, given her near-absolute
lack of experience within the TMO, and that she is trying
her best to pretend that the reality of the TMO and the
things it teaches are the same as that presented in the
intro lectures.

As *everyone* here expected, within a couple of posts Judy
was back to name-calling. That WAS the whole purpose of her
questions in the first place, after all, to open up an
opportunity for her to yell at one of her long-term enemies
and attempt to get other people to do the same. And sure
enough, her cohorts in idiocy did just that, with Ann, Ravi,
and Jim piling on to diss not only Curtis, but *anyone* who
found what he said accurate, or even interesting.

WHY do people keep falling for this shit? You KNOW what is
going to happen if you interact with Judy Stein? You KNOW
that within a couple of "pretend nice" posts she'll have
turned it into another of her bat-shit-crazy demonization
sessions. WHY do you even bother to get involved?

The woman is not worth pissing on, much less conversing
with. ANYONE here, including Steve, myself, and anyone with
half a brain and a memory, KNEW what was going to happen
the moment that Curtis took the bait. And, of course,
it did.

The amazing part to me is that people who actually WERE
part of the TMO, and got involved with it past the point
of the duplicitous intro lectures, bother to try to argue
things with a couple of people who never did. (Jim and
Judy) THEY never had any experience of what was *really*
taught to TM teachers, and of the pressures put on them
to make sacrifices and ignore other responsibilities to
be "full-time" and to "go on the Next Course, the one
that will finally work for you." Neither of them cared
enough about Maharishi and his teachings to ever even
try to MEET Maharishi, ferchrissakes. EVERYTHING they
say is based on taped lectures or stuff they've read;
NOTHING based on rubber-meets-the-road experience within
the organization they're so desperate to defend, at the
peon level, the level of student that Maharishi didn't
even bother to try to rip off and indoctrinate...unless
they were rich, of course.

So what they do is parrot the things that *they* heard,
in the intro lectures and the few short courses they did
manage to show up for, and pretend that this is "how TM
was really taught." That's total BULLSHIT, and I'm aghast
that people keep falling for it.

Please, people, LEARN from this and "avoid the pain that
has not yet come" next time. The *next* time Judy tries
to lure one of you into her endless arguments, recognize
in advance that all she is doing is trying to set up yet
another opportunity to yell at someone. That's ALL she
has, and ALL that she lives for. She's the Internet
counterpart of a shopping cart lady, cruising the streets
looking deperately for someone -- ANYONE -- to scream at.
Do what smart passersby learn to do with such bag ladies,
and IGNORE HER DEMENTED ASS.
-

Yes, how cuntish of me to poke fun at Barry for this
hysterical outburst.

(BTW, in addition to being hysterical, it's a gross and
deliberate misrepresentation of my exchange with Curtis.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> There. Using Judy's "out," I meant NOTHING malevolent
> by that statement. Doncha see?

Or you could go with a Judy approved Jim's technique of including the phrase 
"this is an extreme example" before you compare someone's actions here with the 
Holocaust.  (Remember when he compared me not scolding you with people keeping 
silent about Hitler's murdering of the Jews among others?) 

It is an all purpose out! 




>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mar 18, 2013, at 1:36 PM, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > (snip)
> > > > > > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > > > > > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > > > > > only made 50 posts. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot
> > > > > involving unfairness to the whole group which is only
> > > > > protected by Judy's vigilance. It couldn't be the
> > > > > correction of a simple mistake.
> > > > 
> > > > Usually (as Curtis knows) Alex lets us know if there
> > > > has been a mistake, especially when the mistake has
> > > > put a poster at over 50 and Alex has previously
> > > > announced that they'll be out for the next week.
> > > > 
> > > > Also note my wording, ignored by Curtis:
> > > > 
> > > > "Has Curtis received some special dispensation, *or what*?"
> > > > (emphasis added)
> > > 
> > > Indeed totally twisting and manipulating your 
> > > simple question and attaching some kind of 
> > > malevolent intention to it. Will Curtis apologize? 
> > > I don't think so - he is too wrapped up in his 
> > > self-righteousness to notice how it masquerades 
> > > his own fears and insecurities.
> > 
> > Bullseye.
> 
> Yeah, right. Judy had NO malevolent intent whatsoever
> by questioning Alex about Curtis' presence this week.
> You seem to have fallen for one of her tricks, which
> is to phrase slams in such a way that she can deny
> later that she slammed the person.
> 
> Here, let me see if I've got the hang of it:
> 
> "Boy, Judy sure is crazy lately. I am sure everyone 
> here joins me in hoping that her editing clients 
> don't do a Google search on her name, discover that 
> she's not only batshit crazy but a vindictive harpy
> as well, and find someone else to send their 
> manuscripts to. NONE of us here wants that."
> 
> There. Using Judy's "out," I meant NOTHING malevolent
> by that statement. Doncha see? I said that I hope the
> thing I mentioned *doesn't* happen, and I even said
> that almost everyone here *also* hopes that it doesn't
> happen. So if Judy is off the hook for fantasizing 
> about me getting fired (that's SO not going to happen)
> then I'm off the hook for writing what I did above.
> 
> When are you people going to stop falling for this
> bullshit? Judy fantasizes about the things she *wants*
> to happen to the people she hates, but does it in such
> a way that she can deny having done it later. See below:
> 
> > Wow. Barry *really* got his buttons pushed. It sure
> > doesn't take much to drive him over the edge into
> > paranoid hysterical raving these days.
> > 
> > He must be nervous about this Paris gig. I hope his
> > new colleagues are quick to realize he has no sense
> > of humor about himself and takes being laughed at as
> > a deadly serious insult. We definitely do not want
> > him to blow up at them, get fired, and have to slink
> > back to Holland in disgrace. He's unpleasant enough
> > when he's pleased with himself.
> 
> What a cunt. (I meant that one.)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
(snip)
> Yeah, right. Judy had NO malevolent intent whatsoever
> by questioning Alex about Curtis' presence this week.

I guess I should go dig up some of Barry's jubilant posts
when I've I've overposted and had to stay out a week.

Oh, and the time when I got "special dispensation" for
overposting--which *was* announced by Alex--and Barry
went into total, hair-on-fire freakout outrage mode.

Notice that it would have been fine with Barry if Curtis
had posted this week when he wasn't supposed to.

Of course, if Barry thought I had done such a thing, it
would never *occur* to him to question Alex about it.

> You seem to have fallen for one of her tricks, which
> is to phrase slams in such a way that she can deny
> later that she slammed the person.
> 
> Here, let me see if I've got the hang of it:
> 
> "Boy, Judy sure is crazy lately. I am sure everyone 
> here joins me in hoping that her editing clients 
> don't do a Google search on her name, discover that 
> she's not only batshit crazy but a vindictive harpy
> as well, and find someone else to send their 
> manuscripts to. NONE of us here wants that."
> 
> There. Using Judy's "out," I meant NOTHING malevolent
> by that statement. Doncha see? I said that I hope the
> thing I mentioned *doesn't* happen, and I even said
> that almost everyone here *also* hopes that it doesn't
> happen. So if Judy is off the hook for fantasizing 
> about me getting fired (that's SO not going to happen)
> then I'm off the hook for writing what I did above.
> 
> When are you people going to stop falling for this
> bullshit? Judy fantasizes about the things she *wants*
> to happen to the people she hates, but does it in such
> a way that she can deny having done it later. See below:
> 
> > Wow. Barry *really* got his buttons pushed. It sure
> > doesn't take much to drive him over the edge into
> > paranoid hysterical raving these days.
> > 
> > He must be nervous about this Paris gig. I hope his
> > new colleagues are quick to realize he has no sense
> > of humor about himself and takes being laughed at as
> > a deadly serious insult. We definitely do not want
> > him to blow up at them, get fired, and have to slink
> > back to Holland in disgrace. He's unpleasant enough
> > when he's pleased with himself.
> 
> What a cunt. (I meant that one.)

Thing about Barry, he has no sense of humor about himself
and takes being laughed at as a deadly serious insult.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 18, 2013, at 1:36 PM, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > (snip)
> > > > > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > > > > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > > > > only made 50 posts. 
> > > > 
> > > > No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot
> > > > involving unfairness to the whole group which is only
> > > > protected by Judy's vigilance. It couldn't be the
> > > > correction of a simple mistake.
> > > 
> > > Usually (as Curtis knows) Alex lets us know if there
> > > has been a mistake, especially when the mistake has
> > > put a poster at over 50 and Alex has previously
> > > announced that they'll be out for the next week.
> > > 
> > > Also note my wording, ignored by Curtis:
> > > 
> > > "Has Curtis received some special dispensation, *or what*?"
> > > (emphasis added)
> > 
> > Indeed totally twisting and manipulating your 
> > simple question and attaching some kind of 
> > malevolent intention to it. Will Curtis apologize? 
> > I don't think so - he is too wrapped up in his 
> > self-righteousness to notice how it masquerades 
> > his own fears and insecurities.
> 
> Bullseye.

Yeah, right. Judy had NO malevolent intent whatsoever
by questioning Alex about Curtis' presence this week.
You seem to have fallen for one of her tricks, which
is to phrase slams in such a way that she can deny
later that she slammed the person.

Here, let me see if I've got the hang of it:

"Boy, Judy sure is crazy lately. I am sure everyone 
here joins me in hoping that her editing clients 
don't do a Google search on her name, discover that 
she's not only batshit crazy but a vindictive harpy
as well, and find someone else to send their 
manuscripts to. NONE of us here wants that."

There. Using Judy's "out," I meant NOTHING malevolent
by that statement. Doncha see? I said that I hope the
thing I mentioned *doesn't* happen, and I even said
that almost everyone here *also* hopes that it doesn't
happen. So if Judy is off the hook for fantasizing 
about me getting fired (that's SO not going to happen)
then I'm off the hook for writing what I did above.

When are you people going to stop falling for this
bullshit? Judy fantasizes about the things she *wants*
to happen to the people she hates, but does it in such
a way that she can deny having done it later. See below:

> Wow. Barry *really* got his buttons pushed. It sure
> doesn't take much to drive him over the edge into
> paranoid hysterical raving these days.
> 
> He must be nervous about this Paris gig. I hope his
> new colleagues are quick to realize he has no sense
> of humor about himself and takes being laughed at as
> a deadly serious insult. We definitely do not want
> him to blow up at them, get fired, and have to slink
> back to Holland in disgrace. He's unpleasant enough
> when he's pleased with himself.

What a cunt. (I meant that one.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:

> 
> 
> Very funny.  Nabbie has never heard my two CDs so he is basing his opinion on 
> a few random videos on the Web. 
> 
> And of course he is welcome to not liking what I do for any reason.
> 
> I just objected to the racist term he used in his latest putdown so that was 
> what my post was about.  His previous insistence that I am not playing black 
> music but instead "hillbilly" music showed how deeply he has thought about 
> the whole thing.
> 
> He obviously does resent that I think his whole gullibility routine 
> concerning how crop circles are actually mating beds for bigfoot is very 
> silly.  Or is it aliens or Maitreya running around sideways on the ground 
> like Curly in the Three Stooges?  It is so hard to keep up with all his 
> foolishness.
> 


> It is funny that people think that saying they don't like your art is going 
> to hurt an artist. 


That's where you stumble my friend. More than anything, I'm sorry to say that I 
think you calling your activities "art" is a result of an ego blown out of all 
proportions and that is has nothing to do with innovative, creative or even 
truthful expressions of music whatsoever. It's an insult to real artists, one 
of whom I posted a link earlier today. (Not that they care or bothers to 
listen.) It could pain you to hear this but since you have nothing but disdain 
for my views anyway it shouldn't matter much.

The videos you posted on youtube is a witness to my conclusion that what you 
are doing on the streets is as far from art as it possibly can, CD's is not 
necessary thank you very much, I've heard more than enough already.

But by all means, if it makes you happy to call yourself an artist, why not. It 
hurts noone and make a fool of noone else than yourself.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[doctordumbass]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> On Mar 18, 2013, at 1:36 PM, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > (snip)
> > > > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > > > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > > > only made 50 posts. 
> > > 
> > > No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot
> > > involving unfairness to the whole group which is only
> > > protected by Judy's vigilance. It couldn't be the
> > > correction of a simple mistake.
> > 
> > Usually (as Curtis knows) Alex lets us know if there
> > has been a mistake, especially when the mistake has
> > put a poster at over 50 and Alex has previously
> > announced that they'll be out for the next week.
> > 
> > Also note my wording, ignored by Curtis:
> > 
> > "Has Curtis received some special dispensation, *or what*?"
> > (emphasis added)
> > 
> 
> Indeed totally twisting and manipulating your simple question and attaching 
> some kind of malevolent intention to it. Will Curtis apologize? I don't think 
> so - he is too wrapped up in his self-righteousness to notice how it 
> masquerades his own fears and insecurities.
> 

Bullseye.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:


> Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> he can in whatever way he can.
> 
> Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> about it?


Very funny.  Nabbie has never heard my two CDs so he is basing his opinion on a 
few random videos on the Web. 

And of course he is welcome to not liking what I do for any reason.

I just objected to the racist term he used in his latest putdown so that was 
what my post was about.  His previous insistence that I am not playing black 
music but instead "hillbilly" music showed how deeply he has thought about the 
whole thing.

He obviously does resent that I think his whole gullibility routine concerning 
how crop circles are actually mating beds for bigfoot is very silly.  Or is it 
aliens or Maitreya running around sideways on the ground like Curly in the 
Three Stooges?  It is so hard to keep up with all his foolishness.

It is funny that people think that saying they don't like your art is going to 
hurt an artist. As if everyone is a pop star who needs to be "liked" by 
millions for their income.  I just need to be liked by the person who signs my 
check for my next gig or who buys my CDs.  That is the freedom of Indie music.

I appreciate the intention behind your post. 



>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > 
> > Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> > use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> > insulting me.
> > 
> > > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > > dark history of racist terms
> > 
> > Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> > 
> > > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > > common to all races.
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> > 
> > > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > > are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> > > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> > 
> > Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> > very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> > the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> > 
> > Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> > Nabby was saying:
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> > 
> > So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
> > you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
> > *do* meet the standard?
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> he can in whatever way he can.
> 
> Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
> about it?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> > 
> > Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> > use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> > insulting me.
> > 
> > > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > > dark history of racist terms
> > 
> > Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> > 
> > > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > > common to all races.
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> > 
> > > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > > are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> > > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> > 
> > Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> > very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> > the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> > 
> > Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> > Nabby was saying:
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> > 
> > So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
> > you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
> > *do* meet the standard?
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
> of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
> he can in whatever way he can.

Or maybe Nabby got fed up with a fellow howling in the streets and claiming to 
be artist ? It could be that simple. 
Or claiming to have seen my FB page after a name was suggested by a certain 
Sidha in Britain, namely you. That's cyberstalking, right ?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[salyavin808]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> 
> Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> insulting me.
> 
> > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > dark history of racist terms
> 
> Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> 
> > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > common to all races.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> 
> > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> 
> Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> 
> Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> Nabby was saying:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> 
> So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
> you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
> *do* meet the standard?



Or maybe, shock horror, Nabby just doesn't like Curtis because
of his opinions about Marshy and so tries to insult him whenever
he can in whatever way he can.

Perhaps you want to quiz him about the term Hillbilly why you're
about it?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Alex Stanley]

Curtis did, in fact, overpost, but that's because he kept getting an error on 
the website while trying to send his 50th post. Curtis emailed me, and I sent 
it on to Rick for him to pass judgment from upon high. Rick let him slide.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> >
> > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> (snip)
> > > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > > only made 50 posts. 
> > 
> > No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot
> > involving unfairness to the whole group which is only
> > protected by Judy's vigilance.  It couldn't be the
> > correction of a simple mistake.
> 
> Usually (as Curtis knows) Alex lets us know if there
> has been a mistake, especially when the mistake has
> put a poster at over 50 and Alex has previously
> announced that they'll be out for the next week.
> 
> Also note my wording, ignored by Curtis:
> 
> "Has Curtis received some special dispensation, *or what*?"
> (emphasis added)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> 
> Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> insulting me.
> 
> > Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > dark history of racist terms
> 
> Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> 
> > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > common to all races.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> 
> > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> 
> Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> 
> Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> Nabby was saying:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> 
> So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
> you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
> *do* meet the standard?


Yes there are but they are few. The reason for bringing this fellow forward is 
because he is acclaimed by all races and by now by all ages to be a real blues 
artist, with which I mean the fellow is not copying much but has his own 
distinctive voice. 
And as you know "white as snow" :-) Do take the time to see the whole video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqJOsNMhIRo

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Mar 18, 2013, at 1:36 PM, "authfriend"  wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> (snip)
> > > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > > only made 50 posts. 
> > 
> > No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot
> > involving unfairness to the whole group which is only
> > protected by Judy's vigilance. It couldn't be the
> > correction of a simple mistake.
> 
> Usually (as Curtis knows) Alex lets us know if there
> has been a mistake, especially when the mistake has
> put a poster at over 50 and Alex has previously
> announced that they'll be out for the next week.
> 
> Also note my wording, ignored by Curtis:
> 
> "Has Curtis received some special dispensation, *or what*?"
> (emphasis added)
> 

Indeed totally twisting and manipulating your simple question and attaching 
some kind of malevolent intention to it. Will Curtis apologize? I don't think 
so - he is too wrapped up in his self-righteousness to notice how it 
masquerades his own fears and insecurities.

> 
> 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[Ravi Chivukula]

Right, I don't agree with Nabby's views but he comes across as the most 
guileless poster on FFL. I interpreted Nabby's wannabe-negro comments similar 
to you - a reflection on Curtis's skills, which of course wouldn't be the first 
time Nabby has made fun of Curtis's singing abilities.

Curtis's reaction is so overblown and not so puzzling because it fits into his 
pattern. This is the reason why I was joking that I would be interested in his 
brain scans as he sent those posts.


On Mar 18, 2013, at 1:15 PM, "authfriend"  wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> 
> Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
> use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
> insulting me.
> 
> > Nabbie's use of the them "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> > dark history of racist terms
> 
> Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.
> 
> > disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> > endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> > the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> > their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> > common to all races.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance
> 
> > If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> > being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> > are saying two things. That only the people of the race
> > who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> > that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> > out of certain art forms because of their race.
> 
> Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
> very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
> the standard established by the folks who invented it.
> 
> Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
> Nabby was saying:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208
> 
> So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
> you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
> *do* meet the standard?
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
(snip)
> > And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> > mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> > only made 50 posts. 
> 
> No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot
> involving unfairness to the whole group which is only
> protected by Judy's vigilance.  It couldn't be the
> correction of a simple mistake.

Usually (as Curtis knows) Alex lets us know if there
has been a mistake, especially when the mistake has
put a poster at over 50 and Alex has previously
announced that they'll be out for the next week.

Also note my wording, ignored by Curtis:

"Has Curtis received some special dispensation, *or what*?"
(emphasis added)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[curtisdeltablues]

-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is 
> > one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.  
> > Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.
> 
> Thanks for the rap, and for forwarding Marek's.
> 
> And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
> mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
> only made 50 posts. 

No, I'm sure something much more nefarious is afoot involving unfairness to the 
whole group which is only protected by Judy's vigilance.  It couldn't be the 
correction of a simple mistake.

> 
> Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
> I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
> *to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower. More
> fun to hang out in cafes and museums and music joints.

Sounds like fun.  Not much is going on here, but I'm glad you read Marek's 
piece he wanted to make sure you and Edge got to read it.





>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is 
> one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.  
> Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.

Thanks for the rap, and for forwarding Marek's.

And it's good to see you here. Clearly the post count
mechanism screwed up, because by my manual count you
only made 50 posts. 

Your presence helps to make the place worth reading.
I've been avoiding it since being in Paris because 
*to* read it makes me feel like I need a shower. More
fun to hang out in cafes and museums and music joints. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Race and the blues.

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> Issues concerning race and the history of the blues is
> one of my favorite topics, personally and professionally.
> Thanks for the writing prompt Nabbie.

Translation: Thanks, Nabby, for providing something I can
use to get back at you (by shifting the context) for
insulting me.

> Nabbie's  use of the them  "wannabe Negro" joins a long
> dark history of racist terms

Unless, of course, it's not a racist term.

> disparages not only black people, but the whole human
> endeavor of the arts. If we identify any form of art by
> the race of the person who invented it, we are denying
> their brilliant artistic ability to express feelings
> common to all races.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Renaissance

> If we ridicule a person who performs a style of music as
> being a "wannabe" of the race who invented the style, we
> are saying two things.  That only the people of the race
> who invented it can legitimately express themselves in
> that art form, and that races are simultaneously shut
> out of certain art forms because of their race.

Or maybe "we" are saying the person so designated isn't
very good at performing that style, that they don't meet
the standard established by the folks who invented it.

Whether accurately or not, that seems to have been what
Nabby was saying:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/338208

So how about it, Nabby, are there some white performers
you would consider "genuine negroes" in this sense, who
*do* meet the standard?