David Caleb Acevedo

Alexandre wrote: "You should listen to Regina Spektor."

Oh, i Love her!

David,I found i'd made some glareing mistakes in my original poem that cought your eye,and wich you made such lovely comments.It might be ''NEW AND IMPROVED'' now,so if you liked it before you might like it even better now.I also put another poem,Garden party on this thing.it is much shorter but,hopefully,not without it's impact.If you run across it-I don't know how this thing works-i would apprecheate your feed back.I HAD not gotten a response back to my last communication so I had hoped that I had not said anything amiss or offensive.It was and is my desire that we are able to meet by the side of the elephant in our blindness and communicate under the moon w/a mutual "tenderness that helps bridge the gap that helps remove that empty ache so life drenched wIth that hollowness so common to our fleeting lot".Anyway,i think you're incrediable and i am glad we were able to make a miraginal contact-if only for the slightest pause in our celebration of the eternal flux.I am very interested in seeing some of your art wk,David,and more of your poetry.I am going to be part of a group show of inapproperate art later in the month,that i'm sure you'd enjoy based on what things I've been able to pick up about you from reading your materials on this site.Thank you again,Stan

You should listen to Regina Spektor.

Feeling today like Lana del Rey... Born to Die.

Jonathan wrote: "No problem, I liked your review of Jonathan Livingstone Seagull."

Well, thanks!

No problem, I liked your review of Jonathan Livingstone Seagull.

Riding the Mono. Gone to Topeka.

Those who do not read, do not know who they are.

Pleasure's all mine, mate!

Pleased to meet you, David!

Today I finally dared review Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty porn series. I have to go back to my utter adoration towards the MArquis de Sade's 120 Journeys to Sodom, though:

What is it that makes me adore these books? Is it the fact that I always strive to leave my preconceptions out when starting a book? Is it my willingness to always give books second and third chances? Is it that what trully disturbs me is human nature in general, but not the authors' depictions of it?

I like that verb: to disturb... Disturb the peace, the truth, nature, innocence...

As the victim of sexual abuse when I was younger, and the fact that I was forced into prostitution by circumstances in order to support myself and finish my undergraduate studies, I have to say that I'm definitely not easily disturbed. I'm more disturbed by everyday occurrences, like the murder of transgender Jorge Steven Mercado, who was stabbed to death, dismembered, decapitated and burnt by a homophoic bastard. I'm more disturbed by Senate President Thomas Rivera Schatz, who has used his position of power to call homosexuals and lesbians "twisted". I'm more disturbed by the rates of criminality and political corruption, and I'm even more disturbed by how easily people forgive and forget in this island, particularly if criminals convert to Christianism or are "born again". Literature doesn't disturb me at all.

Almost a decade after having learnt Art Nouveau, I'm still falling in love with it every day. Yesterday, a friend gave me a book on Gaudí architecture. A true treasure, darlings! I have always been a fan or cursive handwriting, and to this effect, Art Nouveau awakens a powerful desire in me to write. It's the art that truly flows. And there's something organic in it too, yet dark, something alive that yearns to be roused. And aroused.

And yet another day passes on this island. Lapses. Transpires. And I cannot but wonder...

The news today: difficulties in patients who need organ donors, how the organs of the Dutch kid murder int he island "gave life" to needy patients, and how the new Penal Code of Puerto Rico, hastily approved by the Republican majority of the House and the Senate sets forth that strikes, stoppages and other sorts of public protests will be punishable by law. And of course, adultery will still be a crime.

On another note: I got gang banged in the Poetry forum for my indiscriminate use of the word "darling." What i MEAN by it and how i USE it: mostly as a linguistic crutch (I don't mean anything by it). While I respect people's opinion on its significance, and while I understand that such opinions are solidly based, I disrespect the forum's participants' readiness to condemn me for my usage of said word, including Donavon's comment of "you are infantile and you don't get a free pass", without even stopping to consider cultural or subcultural bias in the use the above-cited word... FUCK YOU, Donavon! Honestly. Yet, it makes me wonder many things:
1) Can I remake my whole personal linguistic formation to suit the whims of strangers? Should I?
2) Should a person become accostumed to justifying every single thing he or she says, if said thing could prove to be controversial?
3) Is the nature of "respect" a given or an earned creature? And on that note, is respect, on occassions, disrectful and viceversa?

I shall offer no apology for calling a woman "darling", as long as, in my mind, I'm aware that it is a linguistic crutch, much in the same manner as "God bless you" (when someone sneezes) or "Dear, God!" or "Bloody hell!" (when I'm shocked).

Now, I need to vent. Muslim "extremists" (one can only wonder how extreme must a religious person be in order to be called so) have decided to destroy some parts of UNESCO World Heritage Timbuktu, in Mali.

This is the wikipedia excerpt. Read and cry:

"Following the takeover of Timbuktu by MNLA and the Islamist group Ansar Dine, it was returned to the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2012.[135] In May 2012, Ansar Dine destroyed a shrine in the city[136] and in June 2012, in the aftermath of the Battle of Gao and Timbuktu, other shrines, including the mausoleum of Sidi Mahmoud, were destroyed when attacked with shovels and pickaxes by members of the same group.[135] An Ansar Dine spokesman said that all shrines in the city, including the 13 remaining World Heritage sites, would be destroyed because they consider them to be examples of idolatry, a sin in Islam.[135][137] On July 1,2012, the Islamic faction, known as Ansar Dine, or" Protectors of the Faith, "seized control of Timbuktu last week after ousting the Tuareg rebel faction that had invaded northern Mali alongside Ansar Dine's soldiers three months ago. Over the weekend, fighters screaming" Allah Akbar "descended on the cemeteries holding the remains of Timbuktu's Sufi saints, and systematically began destroying the six most famous tombs. Among the tombs they destroyed is that of Sidi Mahmoudou, a saint who died in 955, according to the UNESCO website. In addition, on Monday they set upon one of the doors of the Sidi Yahya, a mosque built around 1400. Local legend held that the gate leading to the cemetery would only open on the final day at the end of time. Scholars held out hope that the Islamists would not also attack the city's 20,000-catalogued manuscripts, some dating as far back as the 12th century. Beyond the tombs, the manuscripts are considered to be the real treasure of the region and library owners have succeeded in spiriting some of the manuscripts out of the city, or else buried them in secure locations.[1]"

Now, I only wonder... How come these extremists are allowed to do whatever they want with world heritages. And how can the UNESCO allow this? How dare they do this to a place that no longer belongs to a specific country but to the world, in the name of an extreme interpretation of a religion that is already extreme? Today is a very sad day. I abhor religions and hate what they do to people. Today is a very sad day indeed.