[Last Update: ]

>From: Rowland Ebright III
>Sent: Saturday, October 25, 1997 5:37 AM
>To: ErnieC
>Subject: Re: Generation?

>At 05:24 PM 10/22/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>Hey!
>>You call yourselves GenXers?  Let me tell ya:  Yer stuff is timeless!
>>I remain,
>>
>>Ernie
>>
>>
>Hey, Ernie!  Thanks for what I take is a complement!
>
>Which particular stuff were you referring to?  I assumed you've been
>browsing our site.  What parts and how much?  Is it any good?
>
>Just wondering how you found us, to.  A search engine? A usenet posting?
>
>Rowland, Guru of:
>The Ebright Commune

From: "Ernest Clayton Cordell, Jr."
To: "'Rowland Ebright III'"
Subject: RE: GenerationLessX (_genminx?)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 15:27:58 -0400
Encoding: 162 TEXT

Guru Ebright & Communers,

My remark was meant as a compliment:  If you want to take it as a 
complement, then it is I who should be grateful.  Feel free to remind me to 
visit again.

Let's see, your next question was "which stuff?"  Well, it being a sort of 
communal venture, I reviewed it rather in the aggregate -- the next time 
you want me to rack up some points on your counters, send me another 
message and I'll look at the individual contributions.  On the whole, I 
really was referring to all of it: It enjoys a certain amount of power just 
by virtue of being a group effort; it accrues yet more spark by being a 
coordinated group effort.  It was nice to have all the navigation banners 
throughout the site -- it give you the impression of people who work 
together well -- a delicacy in its rarity in our age.  The "trademark 
symbols" which mark each section and identify them all on the navigation 
banners do not tell you "with whom" you are browsing, but they are 
avatar-like in yielding a general impression of the "personality" of each 
section (in which there seems to be frequent division and remelding).

As far as how much, since some indeterminable moment in the past (I 
think), it has been difficult for me to measure time; so I shall restrict 
myself to answering how much in terms of extent.  Assuming that there is 
more than meets the eye (my eye in this case), I would gauge the basic 
presentation of all of the areas as one part in seven.  I covered this much 
and assuming that this would be about 15%, I would guess that I covered an 
average lot of about half of your site (let's say 42%, so as to avoid error 
in my conjecture), but I did so with the notion of returning and hence with 
a superficial eye.  Supposing my superficial eye was the one which was met 
by your content, I guess we could decide that I gave careful consideration 
to about a quarter of your site.

If your question about the goodness of your site is a request for my 
personal opinion, I would have to say that the first great testimony is in 
that I was attracted enough by the content to remain and peruse; a second 
and very excellent sign is that I was compelled to respond, and did in fact 
do so on the night in question; so ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I 
submit to you that this work, which both attracts and compells, stirs and 
motivates can be called by no other name but "art."  If, however, you are 
asking me whether it fills that void within the human spirit, repairs that 
incessant longing so characteristic of our natures -- alas!  how am I to 
respond?  Mercy!  Please! I beg of you, kind Sir, have mercy on a poor fool 
such as I am:  I'm guilty -- guilty, guilty, guilty -- I enjoyed it, and 
must therefore confess -- but not without duress, you understand -- that, 
yes, I considered it "good."  If you are looking for artistic criticism, on 
the other hand, I'm afraid this is as artistic as I am capable.

Do you want to know whether you work is an article of public consumption? 
Hmm  .  .  .  they seem a fickle lot to me -- clinging to your every word 
at one moment, but then, in a flicker of the candle -- they are gone. 
There was a nice chap, a writer, in the early days of WWI in France -- 
before the American Involvement -- he was an admirer of Manet.  His name 
doesn't come to me at the moment, but he loved the delicious exotism of the 
paintings of foreign women and sought to capture it in his writing.  Given 
the circumstances, I suppose we shouldn't wonder, but I diverge.  The point 
of my rambling is that he called his writing "a lottery ticket to be drawn 
in 1934" because he knew that the world would receive it only when its time 
had come.  Sure enough, almost to the day, early in 1934 publishers 
scrambled to snatch up every scrap of his work because it was selling 
faster than they could turn up his manuscripts.  I don't recall when he 
died -- sometime in the late 20s.

Let's see, as brevity is the soul of wit, my wit is yet fit for Polonius, 
but I combine the questions "Does it promote the common good?" and "Is it 
morally good?" into one single inquiry and refrain from replying.  I'm just 
not qualified to involve myself in moral judgements.  God knows I've tried, 
but I can barely manage to make choices for myself, let alone tackle the 
responsibilities of determining propriety in the actions of others, 
especially considering their tremendous implications in the areas of fate, 
kismet, destiny and karma.

As to how I found you, I found you more 'fro than to, but that's beside 
the point.  When I was at university in quite a state which was then called 
Indiana, for which they were said to name the school, I was determined to 
find an unusual subject for primitive cinematic exploration.  On the advice 
of a professor who told me to that I had to be on top of things in order to 
cultivate a reasonable perspective, I sought a point of view that was less 
than usual.  I climbed on top the library building and filmed from there. 
 I captured a fellow in my lens ambling away below whose aspect was 
peculiar.  He had a rather triangular bald spot, a forest green sweatshirt 
and baggy black pants, the fabric of which either waffled in the stride of 
his odd gait or were flailed about by a wind that did not touch me at my 
altitude.  I lowered the camera and squinted to see him cross a street in 
the distance where he suddenly stopped, leaned to one side and before 
turning, decidedly raised his arm as though to scratch the pate which I 
could now hardly see.

I accused myself of imagining things as he stood there as though trying to 
focus on the building I had mounted.  Every moment brought me more 
certainty that he was looking directly at the spot where I had perched to 
shoot the scene of differing perspective.  I descended from this precarious 
position, not wanting to suffer the awkwardness of quandry in combination 
with the tenuousness of my hold.

I trundled the stairs with the pace of youth while struggling to keep my 
grasp on the little Bell&Howell, stopping at every landing to peer out the 
ancient windows that refused to render a clear view of the world outside. 
The guy's features were all obscured by something -- He had long auburn 
hair that wrapped about his head in such a way that you'd have to be 
standing right in front of him to see him clearly.   Although he seemed to 
stare directly at the building, his wire-rim glasses with their huge lenses 
cast a reflection that hid any features of his eyes.  His nose was a small 
sharp point from the limited angle of my view and pinched under the glasses 
in the midst of a sumptous mustache, it was no identifiable feature.  As I 
flew by each story in the Cunningham Memorial Library, each window refused 
to serve faithful light or angle of the curious man I had seen.  What would 
I see once I knew?  The unkempt beard could be cut at any time to merge him 
in with the crowd that would surround him at any given moment in that space 
of time.

I was out of breath as I raced outside into the fresh, cool autumn air and 
sunlight that so contrasted the dim and dusty atmosphere of the library.  I 
looked directly down the concrete walkway and through the emptiness into 
large bay windows of Holmstedt Hall across the street.  He was gone.

A beautiful blonde of astonishing proportion and bearing emerged from the 
Fine Arts building, flashing her delicate thighs beneath the fine rim of 
her tiny miniskirt.  For some reason I lost all thought of the mysterious 
man and whatever mechanism or motive moved him to stare so intently at my 
precise location in the heights.

What became of the blonde is another story in itself, but on that 
particular day, with little prospect of sex, I settled for lunch.

I thought of her again, though, many years hence and returning to campus 
on a visit, I took a nostalgic trip to spot where I first saw her.  There 
had been a lot of water under the bridge and a few knee injuries emphasized 
the passing of time as I passed the library.  I stood for a moment and 
reflected, reliving the moment when she had emerged from the Art building. 
 Not having achieved any resolution in our relationship at that point in 
time, I shook my head and walked onward.  As I crossed the street in front 
of Holmstedt Hall, a weird sensation lifted each hair on my back and 
continued over my considerable hirsuit adornment.  I had the feeling of 
being watched, and turned to look directly at the library where my demented 
imagination served up an image of a lone figure high atop the building 
looking in my direction.

I considered the long-since-forgotten memories and decided that my eerie 
tremulous feeling was justification enough to make away.  I walked 
deliberately but not necessarily quickly into the mazes of the buildings 
and came out far on the other side, where the nostalgia mixed with 
curiosity and I went on to visit old friends and classmates

How did I find your site?  I appreciate the notion that you want to know 
the source of your audience.  I, myself, have a website
and try to discover what brings me most of my audience.  Don't look for 
anything interesting, there, though.  My everyday concerns are rather dry. 

But some questions are better left for future discussion,

Ernie
----------