Now I was there to explain the style to those who did not understand it and to explain that MR was a radical magazine and that Yurick was appalled by the drug business. But the writer does not know who will read what he or she has written or in what context or with what level of schooling and sophistication. So does the radical writer, one who desires a transformation of the social order, have any special obligation to write in manner which would make it difficult to be misunderstood, especially about a subject critical to those actually living in the ghettoes? Some students said yes and some no. What do you think?
michael yates ------------------
I think any voice or style or technique needs an antithesis as contrast so that irony only takes its place in relation to another voice: the sincere, sentimental, strident, barbaric, righteous, decadent, cynical, arrogant, nostalgic, naive.
Each set in juxtaposition to an ironic passage, opens both its own tonalities and those of irony, all of which resides in the well of blues, certainly no stranger to prisons and the dispossessed.
Chuck Grimes