Margaret Murphy Fine Arts Work Center of Provincetown

≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥≥

Open Letter to Margaret Murphy, Interim Exec., Director, Fine Arts Work Center  

“Words, words, words,” had written French poet Léo Ferré.  And so in the Cape Cod Times, we have “words, words, words.”  Columnist Kathi Scrizzi Driscoll’s article, “Leadership changes at Provincetown arts center as it renews diversity commitment," is indeed “words, words, words”:  money, money, money… and racism, racism, racism!  Might that summarize the arts and poetry today on ole Cape Cod?  Driscoll notes, “[FAWC] Trustees have credited [Exec. Dir. Richard] MacMillan with raising millions of dollars for the work center that will help stabilize its future.”   Stabilize or rather monetize?  And should art and poetry be stabilized?  

Driscoll notes, “The nationally known work center, founded by artists and writers, was one of just two Cape Cod institutions—the Provincetown Art Association and Museum was the other—to win a grant in the National Endowment for the Arts’ first round of $27.5 million funding for 2021.  Money, money, money! On the other note, Driscoll echoes FAWC officials “will continue to develop long-term efforts toward ensuring that every member of our community feels safe, supported, heard and valued.”  Every member EXCEPT, of course, he or she who dares criticize FAWC!  “How dare you!” had said the teenager.  As an example, I have actually dared… not to adorn the usual artist/poet-sheep conformist money-begging attire and have actually stood up to criticize FAWC and its publicist, the Cape Cod Times.  Would FAWC ever offer me a fellowship?  No way, Jose!  OMG, did I just commit the crime of cultural linguistic appropriation? 

In today’s politically-correct society, boasting efforts of inclusion and diversity inevitably ends up meaning efforts of exclusion and uniformity—thou shalt be in-lockstep with the reigning ideology!  Moreover, when art and poetry end up with executive directors and boards of trustees, art and poetry ineluctably end up coopted, castrated, and corralled… in the name of inclusion and diversity.  Artists and poets end up adopting the sad modus operandi of backslapping and self-congratulating… due to the inevitable absence (i.e., exclusion) of real criticism.   And without such criticism, improvement is likely never going to really happen.  

Silence tends to be, apart from ad hominem, the only defense for those in power positions, including executive directors and museum curators (censors).  FAWC never responded to the criticism I sent over the past decade and a half.  Ah, but FAWC publicist Provincetown Arts’ Executive Editor Chris Busa responded, though not at all intelligently:  

“Silly Slone, I was trained in literary studies during a decade in graduate school with some of the foremost critics of the time. Your idea of criticism, from the shrillness of your rants, excludes any sense of illumination. Please do not contact me again.”  

Apparently, those “foremost critics” failed to teach Busa how to grow a spine and respond with reason and facts.  Power positions inevitably demand a certain intellectual corruption:  rather funding and pleasing the herd of supporters, than truth—rude truth.  Is that what art and poetry should be about?  Methinks no; youthinks yes…

Open Wide

(A Poem for Margaret Murphy)

In general, it seems, 

people don’t think; 

they just swallow. 

In general, it seems,

artists, writers, and 

their executive directors

don’t think; they just swallow…

…………………………………………………………………………………….

NB:  Sent to FAWC Margaret Murphy, Richard MacMillan, Kirsten Andersen, Bob Bailey, Susan Blood, Naya Bricher, Kelle Groom, Jennifer Jean, Gemma Leghorn, and the columnist in question.  No response received…

Mary Gannon CLMP

..................................................................

The above cartoon I sketched a year ago.  For some reason, the editor of Provincetown Arts, Chris Busa, who HATES debate and alt-opinions, sent me an email yesterday (2/4/2020) with the Subject:  "{Virus?} RE: Mary Gannon featured in a new essay and P. Maudit cartoon."  No message was included with the exception of "This is a message from the MailScanner E-Mail Virus Protection Service. The original e-mail attachment "8119-17893_City_Report.doc" was believed to be infected by a virus and has been replaced by this warning message [,,,]"

So, thanks to Busa I just posted the cartoon and also sent him the following message:  "Yes, definitely a VIRUS, one that will mortally affect your very limited ability to deal with hardcore reality criticism!  By the way, I am not at all violent.  I do not bite.  Ah, but I am a critic, not a publicist disguised as a critic. Do you understand the difference?  Probably and sadly, you likely do not. Anyhow, good to hear from you."

One must wonder how such frail characters like Busa manage to become editors.  Anyhow...

...............................................

Notes from the Literary Landscape:  Hot Air in the Blimp

A Review of an “Interview” (i.e., Literary Advertisement)

The writing establishment was perhaps best reflected by Poets & Writers magazine (P$W), which incarnated perhaps better than any other periodical, even more so than Poetry, the corporate  carcinoma.   For a critic like me, it would be difficult to find just one noteworthy article or interview in any issue of P$W not begging for the sledgehammer.   Indeed, the magazine had proven to be an excellent source of grist.

In its latest issue, my attention was drawn to a photograph of an authoritarian-looking woman, glowing in self-contented grandeur—Mary Gannon, former associate director and director of content for the Academy of American Poets.  In the world of poetry, euphemism had a particularly foul odor.  What was a director of content, after all, if not a director of censorship, a Minerva-goddess gatekeeper?  As an example, the Academy censored (removed) my comments and essentially banned me from expressing my point of view on its publicly-funded website.  The term “censorship” seemed not to have lost its negative tinge, which explained the euphemisms, moderation and director of content. 

Today, Gannon was the new executive director of the Community of Literary Magazines and Presses (CLMP).  Prior to her stint at the Academy, she had been editorial director of… P&W and was (surprise!) married to its current editor-in-chief Kevin Larimer.  Had the interviewer, Cat Richardson, editor-in-chief of Bodega magazine (“Your literary corner store”), somehow presented an objective and critical interview or just another thinly-disguised promotional advertisement?  Imagine if Cat had posed a few tough (i.e., uncomfortable) questions.  Would Larimer have published her interview of his wife?  

So, keep it clean, Cat!  Keep it banal, Cat!  Keep it lit-as-usual, Cat!  And, of course, Cat had no problem at all doing that.  “What is CLMP’s most important role?” was the first question she asked Gannon, who responded:   

Our main role is to help raise the organizational capacity of literary magazines and presses and to support them in whatever way that they need. 

Now, what did “organizational capacity” mean?  Likely, it was corporate-speak for money potential.  CLMP’s website seemed to highlight money and presented CLMP as a publishing business, where membership fees, dues, and more dues form the key to its existence.  

CLMP offers membership to publishers in three categories: Full, Associate, and Chapbook/Zine Publisher.  What all CLMP publishers have in common is a focus on publishing literature and a commitment to doing so ethically.  



What did publishing literature “ethically” even mean?  Was it ethical to publish praise of ones wife?  Or was that a kind of unethical nepotism?  Was it ethical to criticize CLMP and its diverse literary apparatchiks, those self-appointed gatekeepers of ethics?  Was it ethical to buffer an organization spewing nebulous terms like “ethics” and “literary democracy,” as in “Support literary democracy donate to CLMP!”  But what was “literary democracy”?  Sounded nice!  But the reality—the reality of those like Gannon and Larimer—was of course not so nice and not so democratic, but rather undemocratic censorship, banning and ostracizing of those who dared go against the grain of the literary establishment.  It was one of support for poets and writers who chose literary careerism over freedom of expression.

Gannon not only looked like an executive apparatchik, but she talked like one:  “Intentional communication is a really valuable thing to help facilitate.”  Now, what did that mean?  Clearly, my critique was a concrete example of “intentional communication,” but would Gannon help facilitate it?  Would her husband publish it?  Oh, yeah, I forgot fees and dues.  



We want to continue to make those spaces on a national level for members to collaborate, leverage one another’s strengths, and work toward this higher goal of making sure that literature thrives.



In fact, everything Gannon said in Cat’s rather short interview demanded clarification, if not outright challenge.  Sadly, Cat failed royally in that endeavor.  What kind of literature did Gannon want to survive?  Smiley-face lit?  PC lit?  See-no-evil/hear-no-evil lit?  Hagiography lit like the kind her husband adored?  Certainly!  But what about lit that sledgehammered that kind of lit with hardcore, no-holds-barred, unapproved criticism?  Certainly not!  

Cat then posed question #2:  “What are the most significant needs of small presses and literary magazines right now?”  Before I examined the response, I contemplated a possible answer regarding the literary journal I published:  finding rare poets and writers who dared stand up and write against the academic/literary establishment, its icons and organizations… including CLMP.  Now, how did Gannon respond to the question?  Money, money, money?  Well, yes:  “distribution” and “fund-raising.”  Sure, distribution was nice, but I’d reached the point of not really giving a damn about it.  Truth telling.  That was the prime objective of my magazine, not getting on the shelves of Barnes & Nobles and all the libraries that knee-jerk rejected it.  That was certainly something that a businesswoman like Gannon likely could not grasp.  And how sad it was when business (corporate) mentalities took control of poetry and art.  I read through the blather, through her blather, the vacuous elation, and of course the obligatory terms “inclusive” and “diversity” eventually formed part of it. 



Having said that, it’s also a really exciting time for independent and small publishing, because in the wake of the conglomeration of big publishers, it has created space for innovative, dedicated people to put together these projects that connect writers with audiences and make sure that literature is inclusive.  Not to say that the big publishers aren’t also putting beautiful books and magazines into the world, but for a healthy ecosystem you need diversity. And I think that’s where the smaller publishers come into play. 

Now, how “inclusive” were the many magazines that advertised in P$W or in NewPages?  To find one, just one magazine open to a critical essay like this one would have been no less than miraculous!  Ah, but “inclusive” had become Orwellian Newspeak for exclusive, as in “seeking essays from women of all ages, races, and sexual orientations who have experienced bullying” (Anthology:  Relational Aggression in Females), “seeking personal essays from women of all ages” (Change of Life), “ inviting young, female-identified writers and artists” (Girls Right the World), “poetry by students currently enrolled in graduate or undergraduate programs worldwide” (Mistake House Magazine), “seeks submissions of well-groomed poetry” (The Ravens Perch), and “devoted to sharing the literary voice of black women” (Blackberry: A Magazine).  Inclusive? 

The real elephant in the room of “inclusivity” was not sex, age, or skin color, but rather harsh critique, the kind that the local chamber-of-commerce-tourist-industry-cultural-council-literary-festival complex (e.g., the Fine Arts Work Center of Provincetown) could not bear.  Now, if indeed “you need diversity” for a “healthy ecosystem,” then why was hard-core criticism not part of it?  Evidently, the reason was that the lit milieu was one of ubiquitous thin skin and, especially, rampant backslapping and self-congratulating, the kind P$W advertised ad nauseam… 

Cape Cod Art

Cape Cod ART

Cape Cod ART magazine is evidently an arm of the "Chamber of Commerce" and its tourist industry, which really does sum up what ART has become and is on Cape Cod, where I've been living for a decade.  In essence, art has become fully coopted and castrated, fully palatable for the local elites, including autocratic library directors like Lucy Loomis.  Criticize the latter and be fully ostracized, if not outright banned, by the latter.  

Now, I am not against art depicting little children playing on the beach or boats glistening in the sunshine, BUT I am against a machine that prohibits art critical of the machine and its diverse organizations and apparatchiks.  TOTAL SILENCE, for example, was the reaction I received last year regarding my criticism of the Fine Arts Work Center of Provincetown (see my blog post on that below a bit).  The local newspaper, Provincetown Banner, refused to publish any criticism.  However, I actually did receive a rare reaction from an establishment-art personage the year before--Editor Chris Busa (Provincetown Arts):  "You are a silly pest that sucks blood from living things."  

In any case, below is my correspondence with Cape Cod ART.  Julie Craven Wagner, current editor, chose not to respond.  TOTAL SILENCE, by the way and contrary to general editorial belief, is not a cornerstone of democracy!  The previous editor, Matthew J. Gill, actually responded.  And how interesting it is to read his rationals for not questioning and not challenging the evident domination of business interests regarding the local art scene...

From: George Slone

Sent: Saturday, March 9, 2019 9:24 AM

To: jwagner@capecodlife.com

Cc: John Lauritsen; cbusa@comcast.net; ppronovost@capecodonline.com; sturgislibrary@comcast.net; curator@CapeCodArtCenter.org

Subject: The cooptation and castration of art and artists on Cape Cod

To Julie Craven Wagner, Managing Editor, Cape Cod ART:  

Why celebrate an art center that ostracizes art critics and only seeks to promote art apt to please tourists and business interests?  The boundaries of art should NOT be determined by the latter, but rather by independent artists not afraid to speak truth as they perceive it.  Contrary to your assertion, Cape Cod Art Center has NOT been “supporting artists and the community as a whole”!  It certainly, for example, has NOT supported me as an independent and highly critical artist living in the community!  

So, rather than celebrate the Center, we should instead DENOUNCE it and by doing so helpfully encourage it to embrace freedom of expression… ALL expression, including and especially that critical of the Cape Cod art scene.  You argue that, in your magazine, one will “encounter artists of all kinds.”  Yet clearly, one will NOT encounter artists that question and challenge the art machine!  That kind of artist is simply not permitted by the art machine.  Recall Thoreau’s dictum: “let your life be a counterfriction to stop the machine.”  The publicized career artist today instead has let his or her life be an integral part of the machine.  By presenting only art that does not offend, you end up offending independent thinkers like me.  

You could begin by manifesting the courage to devote one little page in your annual magazine to such criticism… just one little page!  Without real criticism, art will suffer and continue on its journey to full banality.  If you cannot devote a page, and I suspect you cannot/will not, then clearly your role has been one of coopting and castrating art and artists on Cape Cod.  Might you somehow actually be proud of that?  

Contrary to your conclusion, one will NOT find “artists of all kinds” in your magazine.  One will certainly, for example, NOT find Cape Cod artists who criticize the Cape Cod art establishment.   After all, proponents of the latter tend to detest real debate and freedom of expression, cornerstones of democracy.  

Finally, for the correspondence I had with the former editor of your magazine, Matthew Gill, see  https://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/2019/03/cape-cod-art.html.  Why not check it out.  After all, curiosity did not kill the art-magazine editor, the establishment paying her did that.  

As a footnote, I have yet to find one artist--just one artist--on Cape Cod willing to write a letter of protest against the permanent banning of my person in 2012 without warning/without due process from Sturgis Library.  Why the banning?  "For the safety of the staff and public" was the only reason provided by Lucy Loomis, despite the fact that I have NEVER threatened anybody and have no record of violence whatsoever.  It actually took an order by the State Secretary of Records to force Loomis to open library records to the public so that I could finally find the reason for the banning (for actual documents and details, see http://theamericandissident.org/orgs/sturgis_library.html).  My civil rights are currently being denied because I am no longer permitted to attend any cultural or political events held at my neighborhood library.  Do you care?  Paul Pronovost, editor of Cape Cod Times, has refused to publish anything regarding the banning.  Is that called good journalism... or rather journalism that suits the local elites? 

Finally, if you ever decide to open up to freedom of expression and devote a little page to criticism, then please include this letter on it.  Thank you for your hopeful attention.  

From: George Slone

Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:15 AM

To: mgill@capecodlife.com

Subject: A suggestion et al

To Matthew J. Gill, Ed. Cape Cod ART,

As a rather different kind of Cape Cod artist, I was wondering how I might get profiled in your Cape Cod ART magazine.  Although I do not try to capture the beauty of boats and sand dunes, I do try to capture the reality of the arts establishment on Cape Cod.  I would certainly have plenty of thoughts and anecdotes to share with you, including my view that art should be more than that approved by local chambers of commerce and apt to be purchased by tourists.  

You do mention in your editorial that some of the work you present is “to put it simply, fun.”  Well, “fun” is a rather subjective term.  But, well, I do have some rather “fun” aquarelles for your perusal.  To date I’ve done 50 in a collection I call “Democracy” and now 16 in a collection I call Entartete Kunst, many of which depict local Cape Cod personalities.  Entartete Kunst, as you might know, is the term the Nazi’s used to what they considered to be “depraved art” (i.e., art that had to be destroyed and suppressed).  So, in today’s America, as opposed to yesterday’s Germany, entartete kunst refers, from my point of view, to art that must be suppressed, banned or censored because it is critical of pillars of the academic/literary/art establishment.  It is the glaring taboo that few artists seem able to grasp, let alone willing to break now and then, especially here on Cape Cod.  

It has always been difficult for me to comprehend the artists, editors, poets, cultural apparatchiks, etc., who cannot bear to be criticized.  As an editor, I make it a point to not only brook criticism, but to encourage it and publish in each and every issue the harshest lodged against me and the journal.  What’s the big deal?  Well, apparently it is a big deal.  

Hopefully, you’ve been able to digest what I’ve written here, though I’m certainly not convinced that will happen.  Why not a few pages, even just one page, in your magazine devoted to artists who break art taboos.  

From: Matt Gill

Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 12:23 PM

To: George Slone

Subject: Re: A suggestion et al

Hi George,

What a very interesting letter that was. Very interesting.

Thank you for reaching out.

Can you send me 2-3 images of your artwork that I can check out?

In a few weeks time we will be hosting an editorial board meeting to plan out the 2017 ART issue, and we will review all candidates for profiles.

I'll show your artwork to the group at that time.

I'll keep you posted.

Matt Gill

Cape Cod LIFE

Cape Cod ART

From: George Slone

Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 2:21 PM

To: Matt Gill

Subject: Re: A suggestion et al

Hi Matt,

Thanks for getting back to me.  It would be very (very, very, very) surprising if your group proved sufficiently open to my dissident aquarelles.  It just ain't gonna happen!  But I'll attach 3 of the pieces anyhow.  I have been openly critical of just about every literary or art organization on the Cape over the years.  Sadly, that has gotten me essentially 100% ostracized.  

Now, if you want more neutral stuff, I am also a photographer, specializing in scenes from Newfoundland and Labrador, though have also been shooting on the Cape of Course.  I will be a featured photographer in an upcoming issue of Newfoundland's Downhome Life magazine.  Yes, I can get published up there (guest editorials et al), but not down here.  Newfoundland is as the Cape might have been 150 years ago--cod fishing.  Well, there's the moratorium now.  I'll attach three photos too.  Thanks again!

G. Tod

From: Matt Gill

Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 9:55 PM

To: George Slone

Subject: Re: A suggestion et al

George,

Alas, you were correct. We ended up choosing a different lineup of artists for this year's issue of ART.

I'm curious though. Why have you been so critical, as you mention, of all the different literary and art organizations on the Cape over the years? Are you too extreme for them, or are they too run of the mill for you, or something?

I'm not an art expert, really more of a novice - I'm just good at editing and organizing, that kind of thing.

Let me know some more of your story, and I'd be happy to meet you one day if you wanna swing by our office.

Sincerely,

Matt Gill

Cape Cod LIFE

Cape Cod ART

From: George Slone

Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 9:26 AM

To: Matt Gill

Subject: Re: A suggestion et al

Hi Matt,

Thanks much for responding.  That alone makes me feel not 100% solitary, as an artist on the Cape, just 99%.   Anyhow, as I see it, an artist ought to seek truth and exercise his/her basic right of freedom of expression.  An artist ought to ask him or herself what he or she should not depict… then, now and then, depict it!  Break the artist taboos, the main one, of course, being criticism of artists themselves and their organizations!  Indeed, one truth I have found is quite simple:  artists and their organizations hate to be criticized and will usually ostracize any rare artist daring to do that.  And thus I exploit that fact in my art.  Academics are the same.  Now, without hardcore criticism, how can there be improvement?  

Should I not be critical, for example, of the Concord Cultural Council that at one point had banned "political" art, as a direct result of the art I’d sent it for grant consideration?  Should I not be critical of the Mid-Cape Cultural Council, which will simply not respond?  Should I not be critical of the Cape Cod Poetry Review, which will not publish my poetry for the evident reason that my poetry has a critical component?  And on and on.  In fact, I have given up trying to get public grant money.  I'd even spent $500 to get the 501c3 designation for The American Dissident in the hope that that might open the gates for public grant money.  Of course, I was wrong.

Again, I am confounded by artists, academics, poets, journalists who canNOT brook criticism.  As an editor, for example, I not only encourage harsh criticism of me and the journal, but also publish in each issue the harshest received.  From criticism, I create.

Again, I test the waters of democracy.  On the Cape, those waters are very murky!  And of course one does not know that unless one actually tests those waters.  The gatekeepers of art on the Cape keep their gates hermetically-sealed vis-a-vis the rare artist, who tests them.  In fact, I know of no other artist on the Cape who will question and challenge those gatekeepers.  In essence, doing that has become my artist modus operandi.  I'd rather speak rude truth, than gain entrance through the art gates.  In that sense, and sadly so, I am definitely too extreme for them.  I do not seek to make all art critical of art gatekeepers.  I simply seek to get the latter to open their doors to a little critical art.  Why not, for example, just one little page at the end of Cape Cod ARTS devoted to rare artists who criticize the art machine, including Cape Cod ARTS?  Or how about 1/8 of a little page?  Get my drift?  It's the same absolutely-not'ism found in poetry and writing magazines across the country, not to mention newspapers.  Imagine, for example, I could not get the Cape Cod Times or Barnstable Patriot to publish a tiny paragraph reportage that I, a citizen living on Cape Cod, was permanently banned from Sturgis Library, my neighborhood library, w/o warning or possibility of due process.  My very civil rights are thus being denied because I am not permitted to attend any cultural or political events held there.  Did the Barnstable County Human Rights Commission care?  Of course not!  

My story is a long one, for I have "battled" at Elmira College (NY), Fitchburg State University (MA), Bennett College (NC), Grambling State University (LA), American Military University (WV), Festival International de la Poesie de Trois-Rivieres (Quebec), Martha's Vineyard Regional High School, Walden Pond (MA), etc.   

Perhaps it would of interest to you personally to contemplate what art might be prohibited from the pages of Cape Cod ARTS.

Anyhow, thanks again for your interest!  And indeed I'd be happy to meet.  

G. Tod

From: Matt Gill

Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 10:22 AM

To: George Slone

Subject: Re: Je suis Charlie et al...

Morning George,

Excellent points made in this letter.

I admire your convictions!

I do see the irony of phrases and philosophies such as "all the arts for all of us," and then, yet, there's exclusion.

However, I cannot take on that particular battle on this particular day (day off).

Have a good weekend George. We'll get coffee some day.

Matt

From: George Slone

Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 2:40 PM

To: Matt Gill

Subject: Just Say No to Alt-Art!

Matt,

Good enough, though you did not address a number of issues evoked.  When Cape Cod ART opens its gates to alt-opinions and alt-art like mine (don't worry I definitely will not be holding my breath!), then we should on that "some day" have a cup of coffee... or better yet a bottle of champagne!  Bon week-end!  

T.

From: George Slone

Sent: Saturday, April 1, 2017 1:08 PM

To: Matt Gill

Subject: New issue just published...

Hi Matt,

You are mentioned in my editorial for the new issue of The American Dissident, fresh off the press.  The reason for the mention is my unanswered challenge to you:  why not provide 1/8 of a page in Cape Cod ART to criticism of Cape Cod art (and ART)?  That question is of course at the crux of the art problem.  Copies are just $9.  And sorry, you won’t be able to read a copy in any library on the Cape because not one Cape library director is sufficiently open-minded to subscribe, whereas directors of Concord, Newton, Lincoln, and a handful of university libraries (Harvard, Yale, Brown et al) are sufficiently open-minded…

G. Tod

Christopher Busa

............................................................................................

Our Brief Correspondence

Below is the brief correspondence I had with Busa.  See also my essay "Bards of a Feather Flock Together… At the Fine Arts Work Center of Provincetown" (https://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/2018/08/b-ards-of-feather-flock-together-at.html).  Not one of the artists and poets contacted would respond.

From: George Slone [mailto:todslone@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 8:33 AM
To: cbusa@comcast.net
Cc: eileen.myles@gmail.com
Subject: The Crux...

To Christopher Busa, Founder and Editor, Provincetown Arts, “An annual magazine devoted to art, writing & theater since 1985”:  

Might I humbly suggest that you insert the word “establishment” in front of the word “art” in your subtitle?  After all, should not art and writing be concerned with rude truth?  

I attach a challenging aquarelle because it stands at the crux, at your very problematic crux.  Examine it, if you still have an iota of curiosity regarding things exterior to your art-establishment safe space.   Why will nobody publish it?  Is that a problem?  Yes!  It is a problem.  It is at the very crux of the art problem… to the extent that any artist even capable of contemplating it will likely experience problems in the world of the art establishment, your world.  I also attach the old aquarelle I did with you standing in the background.  

“Go away troll,” had written one of your poesy-establishment cover girls, Eileen Myles.  And indeed that seems to be the extent of permissible debate in the establishment world of poesy and art today.  Rude truth is not permitted in such safe spaces.  Only ideological echoing is permitted.  The crux!  Think!  Now, why not one little page in your journal devoted to criticism of you and your journal?  Pipe dream?  You bet!  The crux!  Think!

G. Tod Slone, PhD (Université de Nantes, FR), aka P. Maudit,

Founding Editor (1998)

The American Dissident, a 501c3 Nonprofit Journal of Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence

www.theamericandissident.org

wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com

From: Christopher Busa

Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 3:12 PM

To: 'George Slone'

Subject: RE: The Crux...

Silly Slone, I was trained in literary studies during a decade in graduate school with some of the foremost critics of the time. Your idea of criticism, from the shrillness of your rants, excludes any sense of illumination. Please do not contact me again. CB

From: George Slone [mailto:todslone@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 2:57 PM
To: Christopher Busa
Subject: Re: The Crux...

Hi Chris,

Well, I had to laugh out loud at your two little sentences of utter outrage.  The, your, severe hatred for criticism is truly mind-boggling, at least for a staunch independent thinker like me.  Also, your predictable "go-away-troll"-type B ad-hominem response confirms that hatred for anything not hagiographical in nature... and scorn for vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy.  It is indicative that perhaps you have never been exposed to criticism, that you exist in a safe-space art bubble.  

It is quite sad that your attitude mirrors that of most poets, artistes, writers, journalists, and professors in today's America, where egregious backslapping and self-congratulating, as in your "excellent writing” statement, is the general modus operandi.   It is equally sad that you and those like you cannot comprehend that safe-space zones devoid of real external critical voices do not benefit creativity.  On the contrary, they benefit tourist-friendly art-as-usual, castrated and fully palatable for the business-as-usual establishment.  Below is the preface to one of my poetry books, Blackhole Abyss.  I should have dedicated it to you.  It includes an email sent to one of your likely cohorts, Michael Roberts.  Anyhow, thanks for your response, though again I encourage you to open your hermetically closed doors…   

G. Tod

Preface
L’Art pour l’art Is Cooptation

With artists it’s always the same thing—100% innocuous/anodyne, total absence of criticism or even reflection on the human condition in their art.  It is always the forme that counts, rarely the fond. Mega-sized paintings, photos, and sculpture are art, no matter what. It leaves me bewildered though, at this point, only a tad, for evidently to climb the art-establishment ladder one must follow establishment instructions and avoid establishment taboos. 

   The art reflects the vacuum in which the artists live—the safe cocoon, often an academic sinecure and/or group-think coterie. The art, rather than questioning and challenging, facilitates the continuing intrinsic corruption of society and its holier-than-thou community pillars. L’art pour l’art, or art for the sake of art, in today’s society is so commonplace, so widespread, that one might not even wonder if any other art modus operandi might even exist. 

  On Cape Cod, where I’ve been living since 2010, the art scene is very big.  Sadly, the art apparatchiks, who manage and fund it, are professionals—gatekeepers of propriety, close friends of the Chamber of Commerce—, who do not believe in inclusion and free expression.  Yes, they like the terms and will use them, but only in the Orwellian sense, as in we believe in inclusion, but your art is too critical, so it can’t be included.  The art scene on Cape Cod is 100% smiley-face art—innocuous and safe. Rare—very rare—artists who question and challenge local authority figures will not be funded or invited.  The local newspapers will not cover their art or art-related stories.  For the local art apparatchiks, the rare critical artist simply does not exist.  I do not exist.  

The birds squawk outside as if humans in general didn’t exist, as if in a time of pre-humanity.  Always I look for that beauty.  Now, here’s an email I sent to Michael Roberts, Executive Director, Fine Arts Work Center in Provincetown.  Did he respond?  Of course not!  What does that signify?  Well, clearly the nail got hammered on the head!  

Hey, how come nobody contacted me to teach a workshop. Hell, I even live on Cape Cod.  Here’s what I’d like to teach.  Is it not odd that you seem to offer everything BUT? 

The Rare Poet as Truth-Teller

What is needed in the art and writing world is criticism.  How does one shake up the established order when the artists and writers are essentially an integral part of it and, consciously or not, abide by the thou-shalt-not-criticize-the-pillars-of-the-art-community commandment?  Few poets take risks.  Few poets will dare speak rude truth to power. Most would rather turn a blind eye, join the club of censorship and ostracizing, and otherwise climb the networking ladder of publications, awards, invitations, grants, workshop instructorships, tenure, and general anointment. In this course, you will be encouraged to question and challenge that dubious modus operandi and, from that, create poems. You will learn that conflict with power—literary, artistic, cultural, etc.—on all levels can provide a wonderful source for creativity…  

From: Christopher Busa <cbusa@comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 9:26 AM
To: 'George Slone'
Subject: RE: The Crux...

Clearly, your eyes are too clouded to read excellent writing, let alone understand. You are a silly pest that sucks blood from living things.

Kevin Howard