Some will roll their eyes... and criticize once more

[Sideways]

lizzytysh wrote:
>Geoffrey
>I regret if you are unable to recognize snide when you see it . . .


lizzy, i haven't written that i am unable to recognise it. i wanted to see the same snide that you saw. i had hoped that the actual snideness to which you alluded could be reproduced, so that i could see it. for it's difficult to deal with something that is not allowed to be brought into the open.

this laurie thing: i didn't know her - or at least i don't remember her. but the name seems familiar. but i feel i do know you, lizzy - at least as well as one can know anyone under circumstances such as these. you are not the type of person to chase anyone away, that is for sure. you are always, without exception, pleasant to everyone who comes here - and that is why you are popular and very liked. but jealousy causes some personalities to resent a popular person, and this 'laurie' woman may have been such a person. in her bitterness she could have made it clear that you were the cause of her leaving, as that would be a cunning and revengeful way to exit. in any case, michael seems to have sided with her, against you. i would have preferred to see some open dialogue about the matter, for otherwise it will stay buried and do nothing but fester. try not to be enemies, but see if you can air your feelings about the matter and come to an eventual understanding about it. this is why i asked for an example of the snideness you saw.

hello, I am no more a messenger but myself once more!

Geoffrey is very right about airing, far better than using a "modern" tumble-dryer.

Sue

[lizzytysh]

I'm guessing Geoffrey deleted the latter portion of his posting [after it had already been quoted] because... he resolved it to his satisfaction; perhaps, some have linked him to portions of the old conflict, when things had reached their flashpoint [a number of which are not properly contextualized, of course ]... suffice it to say that I was not without fault in the matter, either. However, the blame game holds no sway.

If that's not it, then I can only assure you that the matter has been drubbed to the max plenty of times. Any healing that has or will take place between me and Laurie is not for the public eye, even though the results of it may end up there.

Meanwhile, Geoffrey, thanks for your kind comments in passing.


~ Lizzy

[Geoffrey]

lizzytysh wrote:
>Any healing that has or will take place between me and Laurie is not for the public eye, even though the results of it may end up there.


This is to be respected, of course. But when somebody else publicly mentions it, as Michael this time did, it is only natural that a third party (myself, and any other readers) absorb the feelings expressed. Then, upon further enquiry, when one learns that the subject is taboo and closed, it's like having the television turned off halfway through a film. In one song Leonard tells us about a visit to the afterlife, that he was fatally injured in a war, and that he found himself together with other deceased combatants. In the blackness, despite their wounds, none of them seemed to realise that they were dead, not until a famous young girl giving them comfort revealed her identity to them. The song is called 'Last Year's Man', by the way. Sometimes a person needs someone to tell them what has happened - and that's what I was hoping for. But perhaps everything will be all right in the end. It's not very romantic listening to a person gargling in the bathroom before they go to bed, but it's nice to kiss someone with clean teeth.
-----------
I met a lady, she was playing with her soldiers in the dark
oh one by one she had to tell them
that her name was Joan of Arc.
I was in that army, yes I stayed a little while;
I want to thank you, Joan of Arc,
for treating me so well.
And though I wear a uniform I was not born to fight;
all these wounded boys you lie beside,
goodnight, my friends, goodnight.

[lizzytysh]

Hi Geoffrey ~

Nothing is intended to exclude you, and I understand your curiousity. There just happens to be more to be lost than gained by rehashing. If Michael knows more that I don't, then that teaches me something, too. All I can attest to is my own goodwill in the matter. Perhaps, if the issue is considered taboo, Michael will refrain from trying to revisit it, as well.

Returning briefly to the presumptive prerequisite of high-calibre writing for this section, it's significant to me that when people speak of having stopped short of suicide because of hearing Leonard's music at just the exact, right moment, or of others who listened to Leonard, as they lay dying, they don't mention how his lines rhymed, internally or otherwise, or his images and analogies were correct, or his pace was according to proper meter... yes, these are laserly conveyed through his crafting, yet it's the messages beneath it all that makes the real difference in listeners's and readers's lives. Leonard's priority is his concern for other people and what binds us all together in our human condition; it's these priorities that make for his unique choices in material, subject matter, and perspective. I had the privilege of observing Leonard's forbearance, kindness, genuine appreciation, and selfless indulgence with people, on a continuum from one end of the spectrum to the other; people whose expression of themselves hands-down lacks his own clarity and precision. He saw past their fumblings and responded to them as a loving, caring being, one with whom they could feel safe.

So, if Leonard is the acid test; and emulating Leonard's precision in writing or matching/seeking to match its calibre is the prereq for this section, how about starting deeper down, with emulation of his most human qualities first, by treating others with respect. Do you suppose Leonard would prefer that people taking him into account when participating on a forum dedicated to him and bearing his name, treat others decently or harangue them for their shortcomings and some failure to 'measure up'? If respect for others is good enough for Leonard; why not for those who hang out here, looking to pounce on the foibles of people who are simply trying to make it through this life in the best way possible, the same as the rest of us. Compassion, kindness, and respect just aren't cool enough? They are for Leonard.


~ Lizzy

[Geoffrey]

Lizzytysh wrote [fragment]:
>Nothing is intended to exclude you, and I understand your curiousity. There just happens to be more to be lost than gained by rehashing. If Michael knows more that I don't, then that teaches me something, too. All I can attest to is my own goodwill in the matter. Perhaps, if the issue is considered taboo, Michael will refrain from trying to revisit it, as well.


Thank you for a long letter, Lizzy. Unlike us, Leonard does not post messages here, so no one knows how successful or unsuccessful his cyber interaction with various personalities would be. Yet it's fair to bet that, like most of us, he wouldn't be surrounded by harmony for very long. Eventually he would either disappear or stand his ground, probably the former. Understandably he plays it safe by not participating in here, and therefore it's wrong to compare him with those that do. You might as well claim a spinster has better experience of matrimony than a married couple. Finally, you and I both know that Michael refraining from revisiting a taboo subject would be like trying to keep Max von Sydow from going to Linda Blair. You have done nothing wrong, so why fear him? Also, and this is probably the only thing about Michael that is likeable, he doesn't take internet seriously. He is here to have fun, bless his wicked little heart - and we can all learn from that. What did you mean with: "There just happens to be more to be lost than gained by rehashing"? What might get lost?

[Sideways]

Also, and this is probably the only thing about Michael that is likeable, he doesn't take internet seriously. He is here to have fun, bless his wicked little heart - and we can all learn from that.

Dear Geoffrey, I must disagree most stronger. His boxer shorts are very likeable as well and also his brilliance in spotting that you were Ren that Lizzy is too scared to admit that she was protecting a troll, bless her bleeding little heart- and we can all learn from that.

love

Sue

[tinderella]

I met Michael in London and found him to be extremely likable, intelligent and funny and handsome

[Geoffrey]

tinderella wrote:
>I met Michael in London and found him to be extremely likable, intelligent and funny and handsome


I don't doubt it. It is said that nobody is as charming, the first time you meet them, as a psychopath.

[tinderella]

Wow! Is this really a Leonard Cohen Forum we are writing on!......
I didnt read all the posts here, most of them are soooooooooo long I cannot be bothered but anyways, for me Michael rocks! psychopath or not!

[Geoffrey]

tinderella wrote:
>I didnt read all the posts here, most of them are soooooooooo long I cannot be bothered but anyways, for me Michael rocks! psychopath or not!


well that's not surprising either. his type attracts people who don't read too much.

[tinderella]

Geoffrey... get over yourself!

[Geoffrey]

tinderella wrote:
>get over yourself!


original; no hint of a cliche. i am sure michael is proud to know you.

[tinderella]

Some day, we will all live in peace and harmony, until that day, I will keep drinking red wine.