hi joe nick. i'm having some trouble making connections here-- maybe you can help me out. i've never really relied on the kindness of strangers, but there's a first time for everything:

you asked me to write in my own words. i did. then you offered your opinion as such :

David Foster Wallace probably got close to explaining why Kerouac works for me when, in "E Unibus Pluram", he put the case for a return to what he called "single entendre principles", by which he means a willingness to ditch irony in favor of a naive (or so it may seem) sincerity. "The next real literary 'rebels' in this country might well emerge as some weird bunch of anti-rebels ... who treat of plain old untrendy human troubles and emotions in US life with reverence and conviction. Who eschew self-consciousness and hip fatigue."

I think Kerouac's writing has what Wallace has so eloquently stated here in like, spades. Kerouac's writing is and can be sloppy and sappy and naïve and run-on - but what it lacks in technique it more than makes up for with heart and sincerity.

hey, man. no fair. you used someone else's talking.

then i wrote about syntax-- admittedly, i kept it simple because i'm moderately inept at analytical complexities. i briefly explained my dislike for kerouac's themes-- i especially mentioned his arrogant appraisals of 'lostness.' ted mentioned his suspiciously false tone of frivoility. i agree with that entirely.

but you charged that neither of us offered very much in way of argument support. huh? i repeat. huh?

next up on the block is this: if you want folks to take you seriously, in my opinion - show some much needed humility.

you're the fellow who had the inflated gonads to insinuate anything about my private life. humility you say. oh.

but what it lacks in technique it more than makes up for with heart and sincerity. you relinquished your hopes that JK employed above-average technique, falling back on the "sincerity and heart" assertion. so do i, joe. why dontcha like me?

here's what i'm thinking: your problems with ted, and to a lesser degree me, are very similar to the complaints the dissenters have with JK. you don't like what we're saying and you don't like how it's said. why not disabuse yourself first?

that really is my final answer joe. there's something very reminiscent of brickwall in this exchange with you. it would be an egregious misuse of time for me to continue.

waltz n capsize