Our best writer on BC is ALSO Mapplethorpe, Offili, and Serrano all rolled into one.

Add a pinch of Dali, Bruegel, Bosch and stir.

Voila! CW Fisher!

Ofili -- sorry, but it's one "f".


BTW: An art critic recently mentioned one of my art works in the same article as Ofili was mentioned.

(bend, bend, pat, pat...)

What's that giant sucking sound?

Oh, Shark!

How did I become all these people I've never heard of?

What's this "best" crap? You want me to lose my blogging license? I thought you were scratching my back, here you are painting a big red X on it.

Writing is just one of many things I do poorly, but more consistently and voluminously than, say, money making.

To write the CW Way, simply do the following: a) read half an article, b) riff on it, following your stream of unconsciousness as it trickles down your leg, c) make a sharp left on the third to last word in each sentence, and d) take absolutely nothing seriously. This last point is important because it offers you complete deniability for any moronic statement you might make.

Following the CW Way won't necessarily make you the best on Blogcritics, or even just a little better, but the skills you learn are immediately transferrable to many career paths, such as bartending and cocktail waitressing.

But! THANKS for the encouragements. :)

Sorry, I couldn't resist all the homoerotic subtext:

Mapplethorpe?
Bend bend pat pat?
Giant sucking sound?

Get a room, funboys.

That is all.

What's wrong with homoerotic subtext? What the heck? Last week you wanted to see my "man breasts" and now suddenly I'm a funboy? Last week I was a creepy old man and now I'm a funboy?

I'd say I'm coming up in your estimation. Phew!

Hey, Shark! What'd I tell you? Uh huh.

So, Bobba, I read your white paper at the end of Elliott's humongus thread, if a thread can be humongus, and I would say it was... very... ...actually quite goodish in a formal manner but a tad long. Also, use h refs instead of endnotes so we can all be on the same page. Make it punchy. All editors. Say that. Say what you mean. And mean what you say. And never -- ever -- say the same thing twice. Once is enough. Just. Once.

Otherwise, like I said before, you got talent, kid, real talent.

Now, did you start your blog yet like I told you?

Homoerotic subtext.

And this from a guy who called me "Sharky-poo" for the first month he was on BC.

Fisher, Booey wants us.

Physically, I mean.

And he's in denial.

And he hates himself for his lustful thoughts -- Strikes out at the ones he loves most.

And can't have.

Let's flirt with him, CW.

============

PS: Booey, you're aware, of course, that Mapplethorpe took photos of something besides dicks?

Or have they covered that in your grad studies at *B.S.U.?


(And I don't mean Ball State University, "funboy")

Fisher, I also read Booey's doctoral thesis on the history of Iran's nuclear development program.

He's a googlin' fiend, ain't he? A semi-scholarly parrot on crack.

Too bad one can't google for "Original Ideas".

The mark of all poor writers is to spit out boilerplate cliches on writing. I take them to heart even more after reading this post of yours.

I'll take your envy as a compliment, funboys. I'd explain where that reference comes from but we're about two generations apart (at least), so it'd be a waste of time.

I'd also try to explain irony, Sharky poo, but you'll have to sign up for a "Google" seminar at BSU since that's all you have to say about me. Your feigned offense and sycophantic Mr. Smithers act just scream "Original Ideas" to me.

I don't know what the hell HREF is. That should explain to you why I will not be starting a blog. Thanks for trying, though.

What kind of art do you do, Sharky poo? If you were cited in an academic article (anathema to you, I'm sure), you must be far, far better with visual arts than you are with words.

That is all.

...bummer.

I'd explain HREF but we're about two generations apart (at least), so it'd be a waste of time.

Booey: "...The mark of all poor writers is to spit out boilerplate cliches on writing. I take them to heart even more after reading this post of yours."

Um, is "take them to heart" considered a cliche?

"...The mark of all poor writers..."

Rule 5: Do not overstate. (Strunk & White)

"...poor writers..."

Poverty is indeed occurring. This is an accurate statement!