On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Terry King wrote:
> Ron
>
> I wondered whether to reply but you do deserve that courtesy.
>
> If people were to read these lists they would find that I have never
> insulted you although I have suggested that you can be over sensitive.
>
> You, like Judy. seem to take disagreement with your views as an insult.
>
> I would have answered your questions if they had been couched in a form
> that was capable of rational answer. I found the discussions to which you
> refer so full of factual error and illogical argument that I concluded that
> they were not worth pursuing.
>
> I will not tell you how persons not on the list described these
> discussions for fear of offending you.
Ah, Terry the Good is trying NOT to offend. Yet somehow we are left with
*two* insults, to Ron and to me (I leave the insult to reality to heaven).
Klaus Pollmeier is not just right, he has been positively heroic in making
these and related points.
First, let me say to Terry, that if he produces *one* instance in which I
have taken disagreement with my views as an insult, I will... what....?
Grant him three wishes, like the sugarplum fairy? Treat everyone at the
Spring Meet to dinner? Whatever.... I trust that being thus called on the
point, Terry, you will, so to speak, put your money where your mouth is,
and adduce something. Barring that, let it be agreed that that particular
allegation is pure self-serving calumny. (And let me add that my nearest
and dearest suggest that my single flaw is that, far from taking
disagreement as an insult, I love an argument all too well!)
Secondly, and for the record, I have read one of Ron's books "A Pause on
The Path," from Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 1988. In addition
to the wonderful photographs, it is smart and thoughtful, full of
observation and meaning -- as were his messages to this list until they
(among others, please note) were squelched. But even if the quality were
less than superb, Terry's sneering disparagement is beyond the pale.
NASTY in fact. (All the more astonishing in that Terry arrogantly
dismisses all critical theory out of hand, which was in part what got him
into so much trouble on the list in question!)
Now we are asked to overlook this nastiness and just be one big happy
family again. That's called Peace at Any Price. Doesn't work, as history
shows. I suppose it's possible some folks didn't notice, the same
folks perhaps who didn't notice that I was being steam-rollered for
months, and are now wondering why Judy just doesn't "like" Terry. Others
perhaps did notice, but are afraid of Terry. And in that I can't entirely
blame them: He is not only an unreliable witness, he is relentless.
And speaking of which, despite Terry's "who, me?" message today, just in
case anyone hears that I have been so cruel on line that last summer
someone threatened to sue me, as Terry contrived to claim to me privately
yesterday (while saying on-line that he really *likes* Judy), it's a lie.
The teensy germ of the allegation was that someone (also named Michael,
interestingly, Michael Cox) for some reason threatened a person named
Elizabeth with a lawsuit in an exchange that may or may not have been his
idea of a joke. She was upset and copied the bizarre threat to the list.
Whatever that was about, it wasn't me. Another allegation in yesterday's
private mail from Terry was even more vaporous, but I consider it not
beyond the realm of possiblity that either or both of these (and/or
others?) could surface elsewhere. I trust all such will be taken with a
grain of salt, so that I may stand or fall on my real sins, which are
sufficient.
Cheers,
Judy