 |
|
|
Tom Matrullo, a very interesting writer/blogger with one foot in journalism and one in more speculative literatures -- his interest seems to be where the apparent fetishism of fact impinges on the freedoms of opinion and art -- has posted a series of commentaries on the letter that I received from the Times demanding that I take down the Vaneigem pieces. I've taken them down from public view (they are stashed in a secret folder) and put up a special 404 for those of you have linked to it. I've also been interviewed by the Washington Post by a writer named Jennifer Balderama for a possible story on it but I haven't heard from them since Saturday. Tom's writing on the affair is below, kind of scattered around his blog; some of his ruminations are very interesting:
http://tom.weblogs.com/stories/storyReader$1329
and Tom writes the following on http://tom.weblogs.com/2002/11/08
"Why does this agon of journalism against poetry get to me? It has to do, of course, with intellectual property issues; with the borders between journalism and something larger which for want of a better term could be called writing; and with the presumptive clarity or lack of it about representation and realty that underlies the journalistic gesture toward self-definition. As Columbia University President Lee Bollinger has noted, there is little theory in Journalism's understanding of facts. Meanwhile, as Goethe has noted, facts are simply frozen theories, or words to that effect."