To the Unlikely Stories home page

My Furious Hobbies
by Jonathan Penton

To the archived articlesIt's actually quite a challenge to make enemies on the World Wide Web. It's very easy to piss people off in Usenet, or chat rooms. But the Web is very forgiving. If someone doesn't like what you have to say, they'll typically move on and read something else. Only the web sites that really look for fights tend to find them, and even they are often ignored.

This is in pretty sharp contrast to every other medium. In most aspects of our lives, and especially in our relationship with the media, we thrive on conflict. Part of this is just the masochism of modern man, but I like to think there's something sublime in our quest for trouble. We learn little when hearing things we agree with; I like to think that our delight in inflammatory pundits and newscasts is indicative of a desire to learn and grow.

I, on the other hand, just take a perverse pleasure from pissing people off. So I do my best, and often succeed. At parties, in Usenet, and out on the street, there's nothing that pleases me more than the constant sound of people screaming for my blood.

I didn't create Unlikely Stories to piss people off. I created it because, even more than conflict, I love literature, and wanted to promote it. But when writing these monthly columns, I've deviated from that goal somewhat, and written, over the years, pages and pages of shit that I really hoped would kick up a ruckus. It's had no effect, I'm afraid. Whether I'm attacking Christianity, bad submissions, or poets in general, no one has really cared. I've wondered if that's because no one is reading the site, but I do get praise on a regular basis.

I got a little mileage, back in June, when I attacked Bukowski. Several people wrote to me defending Bukowski, but all of them sent submissions along with their opinion. They were hardly flaming me. I did see a little conflict with the following statement:

Bukowski's style is an easy pleasure to read. So is Dr. Suess's. But you'll learn nothing of human nature reading Dr. Suess.

To my shock, two people wrote in to defend Dr. Suess. I still don't understand that. Still, they weren't really angry with me. They simply wrote in to disagree.

So my batting average for causing conflict is pathetically low, but I did, at last, get some real, honest-to-god Unlikely Stories hate mail. On November the 19th I received this missive:

Who the fuck do you think you are??
All of your poets SUCK and Shane Allison does not seem all that sexually stable. I have never read such bullshit in all of my life. Your site was a waste of valuable time and I'm sure writing this letter is as well. I should have just stayed out of there. Don't you take poetry seriously???? Excuse me while I go and vomit.
Reah

At last. True hate, directed at me. Finally, Unlikely Stories has begun to reap side effects.

I'm not going to go through the childish exercise of dissecting this letter.

Oh, who am I kidding? Of course I am. First, I'm greatly heartened by Reah's statement that all of my poets suck. There are 145 poets featured at Unlikely Stories, varying from the famous (as far as poets go) to the unknown, and I often despair that no one is reading them. I needn't. Reah has read them ALL (at least, all of those that were around last month). She has read them thoroughly enough to form an opinion. Jennifer Waller, writing on the message board, pointed out that Shane Allison is the first name mentioned on the Index of Artists, so Reah may have only read him. I prefer to take my antagonist's word for it.

I don't know what sexual stability is. Sex is a complicated business, with both physical and psychic aspects, and "sexual stability" is open up to a lot of interpretation. Even so, I'm sure it's something I don't want, and Shane Allison doesn't need. I do not interview my poets for sexual stability. Presumably, Reah thinks I should. She might not be aware that I do not have sex with all of my contributors, nor do I ask my readers to (although if someone has had sex with all of my contributors, I'd really like to know about it).

Reah then tells us that " Your site was a waste of valuable time and I'm sure writing this letter is as well." Well, I am sorry that the site wasted her time. I don't know if writing the letter was a waste of time or not, as I'm not sure what her goal was. I suspect it was catharsis, and I hope and trust the letter was satisfying on that count.

Finally, my favorite statement, with four question marks that presumably are supposed to denote emphasis: "Don't you take poetry seriously????"

Sadly, yes. The truth is, I take poetry and literature in general far more seriously than I take my healthy hobbies, such as receiving and dissecting hate mail. In fact, I think about poetry constantly. It utterly consumes me. Every day, I read a stack of poetry submissions, analyzing and judging them to the best of my abilities. When I'm done with that, I help out with the poetry and poetry sites of my friends. And with whatever free time I have remaining, I pick up poetry books and read them – ostensibly, for pleasure.

I eat, breathe, and shit poetry. I take no breaks. I take poetry seriously to the point of dementia.

From Reah's suggestion that, despite the fact that I run a huge poetry and literature journal, I do not take poetry seriously, we can guess that I have violated her idea of what poetry should be. Reah has a vision of poetry, and Shane Allison and I have shit all over it. Since so many poetic visions are represented at Unlikely Stories, I find it odd that ALL of them were able to shit on Reah's sensibilities, but, again, I'm taking her word for it. Do you know what that means to me?

I'm controversial.

Granted, not very controversial. Only one person has objected. But controversial nonetheless, and as that is very high praise in the contemporary era, I couldn't be more pleased.



Jonathan Penton is the overworked editor and publisher of Unlikely Stories. Check out his literary works at this site.