Today's Topics:
Garry Shandling on David Letterman(8/18/89)
Journey to the Planet of the Pinks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message-Id: <8908191859.AA00644@hp-sdd.sdd.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 89 12:56:19 EDT
From: "Mitchell L. Silverman" <reverend@hplabs.hp.com>
Subject: Garry Shandling on David Letterman(8/18/89)
Dear All You Slackful Yetisyny out there in UNIXdom:
Garry Shandling, that paragon of self-abnegating nerdy SubGeniusdom(What? YOU
don't walk around feeling like your fly's unzipped half the time? Hmmm.), was
on Letterman tonight, and he had a very odd story to tell. He said that he
was invited to the Washington Post's annual correspondents' dinner. Before
the dinner he toured the White House and met President Bush. The President
insisted that they do a skit at the dinner, which was a comedic occasion
anyway(a roast). He did the skit and it went well.
About four weeks later Garry wound up being invited to a state dinner in honor
of Australian Prime Minister Hawke. While he was there, dancing(under
considerable social pressure) after dinner with his girlfriend, the President,
also out on the dance floor with Mrs. Bush) saw Garry out on the floor, looked
and pointed at Garry, and began laughing.
My question is, did any or all of this happen? Did Garry Shandling and the
President do a skit at some dinner? Was Shandling on the guest list for the
dinner for PM Hawke? And(most importantly, in my humble opinion) did
President Bush laugh at Garry because of the skit, or because his girlfriend
is a two-bagger? These and other questions rear their heads. Anyone remember
seeing any news pieces about these events? Is the guest list at a state
dinner public record? Any and all info will be appreciated -- the man is,
obviously, a really major shordupersav of mine.
Sincerely,
The Rev
Rev. Dr. Mitchell L. Silverman, KSC
The Clench of the Stark Fist of Removal (The Fisters)
P.O. Box 25607, Tamarac, FL 33320-5607
UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!reverend
ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!reverend@nosc.mil
INET: reverend@pro-exchange.cts.com
------------------------------
Message-Id: <8908192139.AA02537@hp-sdd.sdd.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 89 13:02:52 EDT
From: "Mitchell L. Silverman" <reverend@hplabs.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Journey to the Planet of the Pinks
I was intrigued by the slice of suburban Boston life in "Rah-vee-yah" Beach
that Dale Worley presented, courtesy of Spandex Central, and by the important
theological question he raises:
> The $64,000 question is: Is the ultimate example of Pinkness, or have
> these people achieved total Slack, having given up all of the
> pretensions of our society and taken up living at the most concrete,
> gonadal level?
Please keep in mind that my answer, indeed the seriousness of my answer,
reflect my attitude toward our Mutha' Church. Note also that a serious mien
does not a serious attitude make.
I broke the responses to Dale's question down into four possibilities.
The fourth one, the "hard-shell" Discordian's "MU!" response, is the trivial
case. It's obvious, yet it hardly does away with my fascination with the
Massachusetts Revere-era. Thus it isn't really productive, and I won't
discuss it further.
The first response has elements of the fourth(actually the first, but what the
hell) response in it. It's the Taoistic, or "moderate" Discordian, view that
Slack is where you find it. Slack has been defined elsewhere, in the
"orthodox"(actually reactionary) view, as "Freedom, maybe? Freedom to be
weird? Freedom from stress?.... Maybe there's one concept that enfolds all
these things as the Great Blank Envelope enfolds the Universe....
Slack!"(Silverman, _The Epistle to the Slackless_, 1989) If Slack is, indeed,
where you find it, and it is indeed the archetype of "free time" and pleasure,
then Revere Beach is, in fact, a very Slackful environment -- for those who
find it so. Myself, I'd rather cut my throat, , but some enterprising rogue
"body-beautiful" SubGs(if there is, in fact, such a thing) who think that
Revere Beach would be appropriately Slackful ought to try infiltrating the
area with propaganda or, perhaps, a bit of Charles Atlas-inspired street
theater(e.g., I was a 200-pound Slackless musclebound thug -- until I found
"Bob!" And look at me now! Girls, money, drugs -- and all the Slack I can
handle!)
The second(actually third) response is the traditional, hierarchical view of
the Church and its prelates. It is based on the idea that Slack is different
things to different groups of people within the Church. As the Book says:
Although they overlap, there is a also a distinction in personality traits
between the Hierarchy ranks of Popes, Doktors and Saints. Saints tend to be
Masters of the Spirit -- excellent Trance Spouters or Mediums who are highly
Illuminated but often long-suffering. They are usually the poorest
financially because they drift towards quality rather than quantity. They are
the wisest, yet the least knowledgeable of worldly affairs. St. Janor of the
Hypercleats would be a good example of a male Saint.
Popes are High Exploiters, Masters of worldly, creaturely things,
controllers of men's minds. Charismatic and loud, they possess the strongest
of Pstenches and make the best Preachers and Clench Leaders. They make fine
Word Bearers and Media Adepts.
Doktors are Masters of the Flesh. They are creative in the arts of music,
image, and Love; whereas Popes lean to the amoral, Doktors are often Good-Bad
-- i.e., of deep Good alternating with deep Evil. Doktors make superb
AntiVirgins and Healers of Appliances.
The distinct behavior patterns of these three groups can best be observed at
parties, which drive Saints crazy, but of which Popes will be "the life;" a
Doktor, meanwhile, will be found in the back bathroom adulterizing some Pink's
spouse.(_The Book of the SubGenius_, p. 162)
Obviously, not everyone within the Church is a Pope, Saint or Doktor.
Nonetheless, the personality traits are a useful guide. I myself, for
example, have been described as a Pope trying hard to be a Doktor, and
failing(The Reverend with No Name, 1989). The Reverend with No Name, however,
is every inch a Saint -- he gets headaches at parties, and was mortally
offended, even phobic, about a female friend of mine who wants to tie him down
and run her hands through his chest hair. Of course, if you knew the female
friend in question, you'd understand why....(Silverman, 1989). And the third
member of our troika, who shall remain partially nameless, TRWNN refers to as
"a doktor. Not a very good doktor, but a doktor. In fact, he's the Rev. Dr.
Mitchell L. Silverman. That's his holy name, and your[my] real name."
I would say, based on our categories and personal tastes, that myself and
TRWNN would _not_ enjoy "Rah-vee-yah" Beach(I'd dislike it and he'd never even
go there), while Rev. Nameless would enjoy trolling the beach -- but he'd
probably get beaten up once a week. I think that Saints generally would find
"Rah-vee-yah" Beach Slackless, and Doktors(real ones, that is) would find it
quite Slackful. Popes, however, would definitely be of two minds about the
place -- as is, I think, entirely apropos.
The third(actually fourth) view is that any Slack in such an environment is
created by the Con's image billboards and trashy soft-porn mags(like the South
Florida billboard for a certain variety of Scotch with a glamorous person's
picture(male and female -- they don't discriminate), the legend "My number is
such-and-so AND I drink Brand X! And a real phone number. But I digress),
the body-consciousness, the remarks about yabbo-licensing and short, physical
relationships, all contribute to an atmosphere of almost pure False Slack.
And thus, its purveyors and practitioners should be cleansed with ritual and
prayer -- or worse. Emotionally I tend towards this next-to-last(well,
actually last) view. But this view ignores the fact that many of us would
like to get laid by Teresa, Andrea and Tracy(or, perhaps, by their male
counterparts Rick, Peter and Jim, depending on gender and/or orientation).
And some of us may be rich and/or physically fit enough to do so. And while
such "psychic masturbation" may or may not produce Slack, there is long
tradition of "using" Pinks. As St. Gulik said: "Please dispose of Pinks in
loosely-closed body bags -- there might be a hungry Discordian roach in the
neighborhood!"(Gulik, 1987)
Thus I think that tolerance of such rampant, obviously un-Con-trolled(except
in a very rudimentary sense) behavior, especially given that it's promiscuous
and potentially fertile, should be considered Slackly and left alone, save by
any SubGenii brave enough to attempt to "penetrate" it. These are all my
opinions, and, of course, I'd be happy to see what anyone else has to say on
the subject.(You can also give me a hard time if you think I've gone Just Too
Far, but hey, I warned you.)
Sincerely,
The Rev
Rev. Dr. Mitchell L. Silverman, KSC
The Clench of the Stark Fist of Removal (The Fisters)
P.O. Box 25607, Tamarac, FL 33320-5607
P.S. Rest assured that I will forward a copy of the "Rah-vee-yah" Beach piece
to Spencer Katt -- along with a stinging inquiry as to why he failed to
investigate this suburb while in town for MacWorld or SIGGRAPH.
UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!reverend
ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!reverend@nosc.mil
INET: reverend@pro-exchange.cts.com
------------------------------
End of SubGenius Digest
***********************
