Now, you've lost me, Tchoc. Which two "thank you"s? I don't want to miss a single one; but two!?!
~ Lizzy
Sun King
I have no plans to ban anybody from this Forum, and I'm sure all members know that. [Only members I've had to delete are salesmen posting URLs and ads of Internet Casinos and Russian porn sites - they register, post one or two messages in different sections, sometimes with just the URL, sometimes also pictures, and then they leave the forum and go to another. They know that their messages will be deleted everywhere but hope that a few members connect with their sites as long as the messages are there].
That's the thing. The thing is not it was from Leonard's work (what nobody saw it at first glance), but that you used the fact it's from Leonard's work (and discover this only later, after natural and expected Moderators' act and claiming he must apologise to Leonard, and gaining the point against one honest man), and you did it only to test the limits and hurt Jarkko directly. - Otherwise, I thing you're writing is most of the time full of great & terrific insights into Leonard's work ans I usually like those very much.Tchocolatl wrote:But I hope you realize how unfair your provocative posts (like this one an others) are a pain in the neck of poor Jarkko who really does not deserve this. Not to talk about the horrible feeling I have that you take Leonard Cohen's work in hostage in order of dragging attention on you.
Leonard Cohen Newswire / bookoflonging.com (retired) / leonardcohencroatia.com (retired)
-
John the Shorts
- Posts: 491
- Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 4:22 pm
- Location: Wales
-
Tchocolatl
- Posts: 3805
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 10:07 pm
Hum. Not that I want to be in competition - 1) I am such not a competitive persona, 2) anyway I know that your knowledge in LC is more wide than mine in general - but I did saw at first glance, no you are right, I realized it after a little while not at first glance. Well I may be nobody for you - not an important member of this community with no power to give you some power (do I look pityful enough, now? 
) so I guess that it is what you meant, Tom, and this is not a mistake (but a lapsus). 
At least, if it had been post in the Leonard Cohen poetry's an novel section - and was presented in manner to begin a real thread about it, it would have make the sense Snow tried to give it to his post. But no. Come on Snow! You can do better 
Indeed a little delinquency is necessery put, it is like doing sport, a kind of art. 
Lz, it refers to another "conversation" we had here in another thread (and those "ty" were to Snow) but in the same forum, take my word for it! Or otherwise, find it (as you an I are, let say, post, here, have fun.
John! Oh! I figure that a guy who comes here with his shorts on don't appreciate people who went without. Don't worry, be happy!
) so I guess that it is what you meant, Tom, and this is not a mistake (but a lapsus). At least, if it had been post in the Leonard Cohen poetry's an novel section - and was presented in manner to begin a real thread about it, it would have make the sense Snow tried to give it to his post. But no. Come on Snow! You can do better Indeed a little delinquency is necessery put, it is like doing sport, a kind of art. Lz, it refers to another "conversation" we had here in another thread (and those "ty" were to Snow) but in the same forum, take my word for it!
Or otherwise, find it (as you an I are, let say, post, here, have fun. John! Oh! I figure that a guy who comes here with his shorts on don't appreciate people who went without.
Don't worry, be happy! Okay, I have no idea what Snow's truest motives were for posting as he did. You'll need to tell us that, Snow. The one thing I do feel pretty sure about is contrary to what you've said, Tchoc. Even though Snow has, in various ways, shown himself to have a very sensitive spirit, I don't feel that popularity [or lack of it] here is one of his concerns. He arrives here with plenty of affection and respect from long-timers, and is solidly based in the Cohen community. I've been aware of that for several years now ~ knowing some mutual acquaintances; reading some exchanges in the newsgroup, way back when, and encountering and conversing [one very delightful exchange over our similar interpretation of one of Leonard's poems a couple years back, which took place in the main room, as well as a window] in the chatroom. Then, here ~ an arrival I was glad to see; and that I also recall Bobbie expressing gladness about. Please correct me if I'm wrong in my conclusion, Snow [regarding your seeking of acceptance here].
Some people just have the nature of having to push boundaries. It doesn't really matter from what direction those boundaries come. I didn't interpret it as a reflection of his [your] respect/disrespect for Jarkko, but rather something that has an internal measure. "Don't Fence Me In" is a song that comes to mind. Jarkko did what Jarkko needed to do, as well. The posting was intentionally misleading, and wasn't where it needed to be or presented as it needed to be presented, to be considered a topic for serious discussion. I'm not sure how long the chapter is, where it's located, but discussion of the chapter, as a whole, would be interesting. Context makes all the difference ~ as many a celebrity is well aware.
He [you, Snow, as I don't care for talking about you in the third person] knew that there was a 'Leonard legitimacy' in this posting, yet it was presented in oblique fashion for another purpose. To play with people's minds? To see who knew and who didn't know the source, which would have been obvious had it been placed in its appropriate section? I don't really know. It was one of three provocative postings. Maybe it was one of those mornings when you were full of [as the saying goes] 'piss and vinegar' and just went for it. I'm curious, myself, so would really be interested in anything you have to say on it.
As for what Leonard would or wouldn't write today, I'm not really so sure that he would write such a passage today. It seems that he's taken a path/paths that would more likely result in a different kind of expression. I feel that Leonard's age at the time of this writing may be relevant. Not that he should be ashamed of what he wrote; but, perhaps, that shock value does not play as important a part in his writing as it once did. He has since had two children, including a daughter who passed through teen years and being 13, herself. I believe a person's perspectives change with the years, and as societally confrontive as he may have been at one time, it may be much less important to him now.
Love,
Lizzy
Some people just have the nature of having to push boundaries. It doesn't really matter from what direction those boundaries come. I didn't interpret it as a reflection of his [your] respect/disrespect for Jarkko, but rather something that has an internal measure. "Don't Fence Me In" is a song that comes to mind. Jarkko did what Jarkko needed to do, as well. The posting was intentionally misleading, and wasn't where it needed to be or presented as it needed to be presented, to be considered a topic for serious discussion. I'm not sure how long the chapter is, where it's located, but discussion of the chapter, as a whole, would be interesting. Context makes all the difference ~ as many a celebrity is well aware.
He [you, Snow, as I don't care for talking about you in the third person] knew that there was a 'Leonard legitimacy' in this posting, yet it was presented in oblique fashion for another purpose. To play with people's minds? To see who knew and who didn't know the source, which would have been obvious had it been placed in its appropriate section? I don't really know. It was one of three provocative postings. Maybe it was one of those mornings when you were full of [as the saying goes] 'piss and vinegar' and just went for it. I'm curious, myself, so would really be interested in anything you have to say on it.
As for what Leonard would or wouldn't write today, I'm not really so sure that he would write such a passage today. It seems that he's taken a path/paths that would more likely result in a different kind of expression. I feel that Leonard's age at the time of this writing may be relevant. Not that he should be ashamed of what he wrote; but, perhaps, that shock value does not play as important a part in his writing as it once did. He has since had two children, including a daughter who passed through teen years and being 13, herself. I believe a person's perspectives change with the years, and as societally confrontive as he may have been at one time, it may be much less important to him now.
Love,
Lizzy
-
Snow (retired)
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:18 pm
Dear Bobbie, Lizzytysh, Jarkko, Tchocolatl, Tom - well, I can't remember everybody. And I don't believe I'm going to manage to reply to all of the wonderfully engaged responses. No matter where you stand, I thank you for being a player - for participating in what I consider an important issue. As time or circumstances allow, I hope to pop in and tackle some of your words - in as quiet a fashion as possible. Meanwhile, I would like to give a little response to a message that . . .
John the Shorts wrote:
>Well I've really stirred up a hornets nest by reporting the post, and even though it's Leonard's work I still find it offensive.
The post was not Leonard's work - it was mine. But had you been familiar with a particular area of his texts you might have recognised it. I described a scene identical to one that appears in a crucial passage in one of his novels - and I asked a question. For this I was publicly flogged by the moderator and told to take such posts elsewhere. Leonard was a 32 year-old adult man when he wrote his masterpiece. He signed it and published it under his real name, because he was proud of it, and I very much suspect is still. Perhaps there is something wrong with me, because I don't blame him for not hiding behind a nom de plume; I believe that the book is absolutely magnificent - and that it will be republished again and again for many years. The irony is that even in a forum dedicated to his work one has to speak of it in whispers because, as Jarkko says: "it remains plain pornography for most of the Forum visitors." He openly admits that he doesn't care whether Leonard wrote it or not, that "it's something we don't need here." Well, I have become so nervous. Even though I do not shy away from confrontation I will confess that I do not enjoy being the centre of a controversy - even though I occasionally find myself there. I am now afraid, even to mention the name of the work that nearly crucified me. I am also angry, because the bullets fired at me passed straight through and went into Leonard - and I request an apology on his behalf. With that I will finish for today, with something that was said about five years ago, apparently by a 'pornographer'.
Geoffrey
"This is a difficult book, even in English, if it is taken too seriously. May I suggest that you skip over the parts you don't like? Dip into it here and there. Perhaps there will be a passage, or even a page, that resonates with your curiosity. After a while, if you are sufficiently bored or unemployed, you may want to read it from cover to cover."
[Leonard Cohen 2000]
John the Shorts wrote:
>Well I've really stirred up a hornets nest by reporting the post, and even though it's Leonard's work I still find it offensive.
The post was not Leonard's work - it was mine. But had you been familiar with a particular area of his texts you might have recognised it. I described a scene identical to one that appears in a crucial passage in one of his novels - and I asked a question. For this I was publicly flogged by the moderator and told to take such posts elsewhere. Leonard was a 32 year-old adult man when he wrote his masterpiece. He signed it and published it under his real name, because he was proud of it, and I very much suspect is still. Perhaps there is something wrong with me, because I don't blame him for not hiding behind a nom de plume; I believe that the book is absolutely magnificent - and that it will be republished again and again for many years. The irony is that even in a forum dedicated to his work one has to speak of it in whispers because, as Jarkko says: "it remains plain pornography for most of the Forum visitors." He openly admits that he doesn't care whether Leonard wrote it or not, that "it's something we don't need here." Well, I have become so nervous. Even though I do not shy away from confrontation I will confess that I do not enjoy being the centre of a controversy - even though I occasionally find myself there. I am now afraid, even to mention the name of the work that nearly crucified me. I am also angry, because the bullets fired at me passed straight through and went into Leonard - and I request an apology on his behalf. With that I will finish for today, with something that was said about five years ago, apparently by a 'pornographer'.
Geoffrey
"This is a difficult book, even in English, if it is taken too seriously. May I suggest that you skip over the parts you don't like? Dip into it here and there. Perhaps there will be a passage, or even a page, that resonates with your curiosity. After a while, if you are sufficiently bored or unemployed, you may want to read it from cover to cover."
[Leonard Cohen 2000]
-
John the Shorts
- Posts: 491
- Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 4:22 pm
- Location: Wales
Snow
So which is true
As I said to Jarkko it was the content I found offensive, regardless of the source
So which is true
orWould you be as quick to judge and condemn if I told you the deleted question was taken from Leonard's work? The answer, by the way, is an eleven-letter word beginning with 'b'. Unfortunately I cannot reproduce the original passage as proof because of it's "pedophile-type content".
Are you the writer of the offensive and illegal (in many countries) piece?The post was not Leonard's work - it was mine.
As I said to Jarkko it was the content I found offensive, regardless of the source
To err is human
To forgive is against government policy
JTS
To forgive is against government policy
JTS
So, it was or it was not from Beautiful Losers? (Unfortunately, I came to late to see it.)
I never thought BL is offensive book, and I actually enjoy offensive books like BL or William Burrough's works. But your mroal point, Snow, isn't correct because you didn't prove anything about people's rection to "offensive" literature or Beautiful Losers, but only impression you did is that you used it consciously for proving something you had on your mind against the webmaster. Back to those two "NO" questions from few days ago, why you would think there would be no moderator checking the messages (their political and other content, from sexual crimes to spams and political violence of fascict hate speech) as it's usual on all normal forums in the world? And, also, taking the paragraph (if it was) from the book's context is only misuse of literature and art.
And, for the record, John the Shorts was NOT the only one to report this post to Jarkko. He erased the post after at least few requests.
I never thought BL is offensive book, and I actually enjoy offensive books like BL or William Burrough's works. But your mroal point, Snow, isn't correct because you didn't prove anything about people's rection to "offensive" literature or Beautiful Losers, but only impression you did is that you used it consciously for proving something you had on your mind against the webmaster. Back to those two "NO" questions from few days ago, why you would think there would be no moderator checking the messages (their political and other content, from sexual crimes to spams and political violence of fascict hate speech) as it's usual on all normal forums in the world? And, also, taking the paragraph (if it was) from the book's context is only misuse of literature and art.
And, for the record, John the Shorts was NOT the only one to report this post to Jarkko. He erased the post after at least few requests.
Leonard Cohen Newswire / bookoflonging.com (retired) / leonardcohencroatia.com (retired)
-
Snow (retired)
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:18 pm
John the Shorts wrote:
>So which is true -
>
>>Would you be as quick to judge and condemn if I told you the deleted question was taken from Leonard's work? The answer, by the way, is an eleven-letter word beginning with 'b'. Unfortunately I cannot reproduce the original passage as proof because of it's "pedophile-type content".
Thank you for taking such a keen interest. Offensive material can be quite fascinating, as you seem to be discovering. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the question was mine. The entire post was mine. But it was taken from Leonard's work, and I think one would need to be a stubborn legalist to argue that point. Perhaps 'stolen' would be a better word than 'taken? If you kept a copy of the post you reported, and I'm sure you did, and you are old enough to read Leonard's adult material, I think you will eventually find from whence it came. Failing that, I could post Leonard's passage right here - verbatim. But only on condition Jarkko gives permission and that you promise to keep your hands up on the keyboard.
>or:
>
>>The post was not Leonard's work - it was mine.
True.
>Are you the writer of the offensive and illegal (in many countries) piece?
Which coutries?
>As I said to Jarkko it was the content I found offensive, regardless of the source.
And that is what makes you so precious. For without you 'Beautiful Losers' may have just been another great book that sank without causing a ripple. To someone like Leonard you are a Christmas present - and I am taking quite a liking to you as well.
g
PS:
Dear Tom, I have just seen your post. Will answer when I come home. Pray there are not too many others waiting because responding has never been my best virtue. Just one of the many things at which I am hopeless. Enjoy your day!
>So which is true -
>
>>Would you be as quick to judge and condemn if I told you the deleted question was taken from Leonard's work? The answer, by the way, is an eleven-letter word beginning with 'b'. Unfortunately I cannot reproduce the original passage as proof because of it's "pedophile-type content".
Thank you for taking such a keen interest. Offensive material can be quite fascinating, as you seem to be discovering. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the question was mine. The entire post was mine. But it was taken from Leonard's work, and I think one would need to be a stubborn legalist to argue that point. Perhaps 'stolen' would be a better word than 'taken? If you kept a copy of the post you reported, and I'm sure you did, and you are old enough to read Leonard's adult material, I think you will eventually find from whence it came. Failing that, I could post Leonard's passage right here - verbatim. But only on condition Jarkko gives permission and that you promise to keep your hands up on the keyboard.
>or:
>
>>The post was not Leonard's work - it was mine.
True.
>Are you the writer of the offensive and illegal (in many countries) piece?
Which coutries?
>As I said to Jarkko it was the content I found offensive, regardless of the source.
And that is what makes you so precious. For without you 'Beautiful Losers' may have just been another great book that sank without causing a ripple. To someone like Leonard you are a Christmas present - and I am taking quite a liking to you as well.
g
PS:
Dear Tom, I have just seen your post. Will answer when I come home. Pray there are not too many others waiting because responding has never been my best virtue. Just one of the many things at which I am hopeless. Enjoy your day!
-
Young dr. Freud
- Posts: 667
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:41 am
Oh, get a grip Snowball.
Not everyone has been as bored or as unemployed as you have been obviously. Why don't you take that NG superiority complex and write a 60,000,000 word essay on Leonard's navel. All that gazing you do. Ick.
YdF
P.S. If Jarkko ever apologizes to Leonard for getting hit by bullets meant for you, I'll leave the forum.
P.P.S. (Lizzytysh...don't even think it.)
Not everyone has been as bored or as unemployed as you have been obviously. Why don't you take that NG superiority complex and write a 60,000,000 word essay on Leonard's navel. All that gazing you do. Ick.
YdF
P.S. If Jarkko ever apologizes to Leonard for getting hit by bullets meant for you, I'll leave the forum.
P.P.S. (Lizzytysh...don't even think it.)
-
Tchocolatl
- Posts: 3805
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 10:07 pm
Lz, I never wrote, in the case of Snow, that popularity was the issue. I wrote attention. I see nothing wrong about this. What I am questionning is that I think he could do better to obtain attention. However, he obtained attention and the behavior, therefore, is reinforced.
Not a big thing for me, but my concern is for him. I think it is a waste of his great sensitivity.
Tom, really. BL not being a shocking book. Did you really read it. There is some parts that are so disgusting, I did through the book at the other end of my 6 feet coach and don't touch it since the nausea was over, wich was the day after. I did this many times while reading it. Usually I am the one who read a novel from cover to cover in one shot. And I tell you I am not easely chocked. I am the anti-thesis of petite-bourgeoise.
Now maybe I have to say why I am so mad at you. It is because of this official Croatian site on wikipedia:
Foreign-language sites
* Official French Leonard Cohen site.
* A Thousand Kisses Deep, Official Croatian site.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Cohen
I sent you a friendly e-mail to notify you (and another webm) that you could enter your site on wikipedia page and after I did read that my information was used to put what I think is some false information. I felt abused.
Tell me, please, as I don't read Croatian : Is this a real official web site? Or not? If it is I'll calm myself. If it is not, please correct.
Because this is also an abuse. Any lies are and an abuse. So when I read your words of vierge offensée about Geoffrey who in your eyes are taking Leonard Cohen's work in hostage, please act accordingly.
Also, the post of Jurica PLEASE was without any regard for people, so I understand very well that some people could been hurt and react to it by delinquency. It was as rude and selfish as a slap in the face, because one would have stand in the sunshine of another. The idea was good, though, but it could have been bring in a respectful manner, not in this arrogant tone. Jurica is Jurica he is like this, rough, as far as I have read his stuff, here. But you back him without a shadow of concern for people's feelings.
Now, If your site and popularity are more important than Leonard Cohen works, and people, this is where I am not on the same road.
So. Please answer, is it an official site. Or not?
Not a big thing for me, but my concern is for him. I think it is a waste of his great sensitivity.
Tom, really. BL not being a shocking book. Did you really read it. There is some parts that are so disgusting, I did through the book at the other end of my 6 feet coach and don't touch it since the nausea was over, wich was the day after. I did this many times while reading it. Usually I am the one who read a novel from cover to cover in one shot. And I tell you I am not easely chocked. I am the anti-thesis of petite-bourgeoise.
Now maybe I have to say why I am so mad at you. It is because of this official Croatian site on wikipedia:
Foreign-language sites
* Official French Leonard Cohen site.
* A Thousand Kisses Deep, Official Croatian site.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Cohen
I sent you a friendly e-mail to notify you (and another webm) that you could enter your site on wikipedia page and after I did read that my information was used to put what I think is some false information. I felt abused.
Tell me, please, as I don't read Croatian : Is this a real official web site? Or not? If it is I'll calm myself. If it is not, please correct.
Because this is also an abuse. Any lies are and an abuse. So when I read your words of vierge offensée about Geoffrey who in your eyes are taking Leonard Cohen's work in hostage, please act accordingly.
Also, the post of Jurica PLEASE was without any regard for people, so I understand very well that some people could been hurt and react to it by delinquency. It was as rude and selfish as a slap in the face, because one would have stand in the sunshine of another. The idea was good, though, but it could have been bring in a respectful manner, not in this arrogant tone. Jurica is Jurica he is like this, rough, as far as I have read his stuff, here. But you back him without a shadow of concern for people's feelings.
Now, If your site and popularity are more important than Leonard Cohen works, and people, this is where I am not on the same road.
So. Please answer, is it an official site. Or not?
Snow wrote-
The 20 year old man-artist or writer is not the same man at the age of 60. Why would you think LC needed to go up to the MB to become a monk, to cleanse his soul? Perhaps there were many regrets and wishing to burn things of the past, but we will never know that, and we don't need to, it is his personal life. Giant in literature like Gogol, who indeed was a genius burned his last manuscript. We might consider that manuscript as a the highest work in literature-but he himself did not. Tolstoy, Turgenev, the list can go on and on-have burned they manuscripts. Michelangelo coming closer to the end of his life-was destroying-smashing his most recent sculptures. No one is more critical to themselves, than the great artist himself.
I took out my book of Leonard's-Stranger Music-selected Poems and Songs. There are some novels from the Beautiful Losers-2 of theses novels are pure pornography-( quite appalling to my taste, but it does not matter). What matters is, that I doubt Leonard would be so proud of them, Snow, as you are today.
More interesting is, that in the book, LC him self writes-
Nancy Bacal made the selection with the assistance of Rebecca De Mornay and the author. Bill Furey came up with a selection several years ago which was consulted. Karen Lynch and Kelley Lynch prepared the manuscripts. Ellen Seligman, my editors at M&S, saw it through to publication. I want to thank all those concerned. Don't you think, Snow, that even therein these lines is something, quite regrettable for Leonard?
And please, please don't act, as if you were Leonard's agent, consular and publisher. You are doing more harm than good. Your placing Leonard on the list of the best writer in 50 years, people can start to scrutinize things, which might not work in Leonard's favor. I suspect, he himself would not wish to be on that list- he is much too smart for that.
Snow-every artist makes 10 pieces of crap, after that perhaps 1 painting comes out OK, so do writers&poets. The advantage for artists is, if the piece was not sold, they still can burn it in flames. Unfortunately for writers, it does not work that way, the crap has been printed and it is out forever-the writer, who would burn his old writings with urgency, can't do nothing about it anymore.Jarkko, Leonard is a brilliant novelist - and I will not allow you nor anyone to totally negate his work as 'plain pornography' written by a 'young Leonard' - as if he didn't know better - as if he should be ashamed! If only you knew how much you 'guardians of beauty' unintentionally hurt Leonard.
The 20 year old man-artist or writer is not the same man at the age of 60. Why would you think LC needed to go up to the MB to become a monk, to cleanse his soul? Perhaps there were many regrets and wishing to burn things of the past, but we will never know that, and we don't need to, it is his personal life. Giant in literature like Gogol, who indeed was a genius burned his last manuscript. We might consider that manuscript as a the highest work in literature-but he himself did not. Tolstoy, Turgenev, the list can go on and on-have burned they manuscripts. Michelangelo coming closer to the end of his life-was destroying-smashing his most recent sculptures. No one is more critical to themselves, than the great artist himself.
I took out my book of Leonard's-Stranger Music-selected Poems and Songs. There are some novels from the Beautiful Losers-2 of theses novels are pure pornography-( quite appalling to my taste, but it does not matter). What matters is, that I doubt Leonard would be so proud of them, Snow, as you are today.
More interesting is, that in the book, LC him self writes-
Nancy Bacal made the selection with the assistance of Rebecca De Mornay and the author. Bill Furey came up with a selection several years ago which was consulted. Karen Lynch and Kelley Lynch prepared the manuscripts. Ellen Seligman, my editors at M&S, saw it through to publication. I want to thank all those concerned. Don't you think, Snow, that even therein these lines is something, quite regrettable for Leonard?
And please, please don't act, as if you were Leonard's agent, consular and publisher. You are doing more harm than good. Your placing Leonard on the list of the best writer in 50 years, people can start to scrutinize things, which might not work in Leonard's favor. I suspect, he himself would not wish to be on that list- he is much too smart for that.
bee
-
Tchocolatl
- Posts: 3805
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 10:07 pm
Bee, you are doing more assumptions in your last post, then Snow in the entire forum.
BL is already considered a masterpiece. It was when it came out. The porn in it is not free in it. It is not because some parts disgusted me that I can not see the value of the work. It is a powerful book. Leonard, I say this often, is an artist of the heart, the intellect and the body. Don't ask me why but people often stay stock at the body level when it is in cause even if head and heart are sollicited as well. Sorry for those who did stay stock at this level. They are missing something.
Tom, don't tell me you does no't have the answer to my question in your regard, you who has the answer for everything in regard of Leonard.
Or are you afraid to answer me? Is your site is an official site or not? Thank you in advance.
As if it is not, I find the false information you put on wikipédia far mor offensensive for Leonard (and Jarkko), than any porn post Snow could have post here.
BL is already considered a masterpiece. It was when it came out. The porn in it is not free in it. It is not because some parts disgusted me that I can not see the value of the work. It is a powerful book. Leonard, I say this often, is an artist of the heart, the intellect and the body. Don't ask me why but people often stay stock at the body level when it is in cause even if head and heart are sollicited as well. Sorry for those who did stay stock at this level. They are missing something.
Tom, don't tell me you does no't have the answer to my question in your regard, you who has the answer for everything in regard of Leonard.
Or are you afraid to answer me? Is your site is an official site or not? Thank you in advance.
As if it is not, I find the false information you put on wikipédia far mor offensensive for Leonard (and Jarkko), than any porn post Snow could have post here.