Theaker’s Quarterly Fiction

“Poor in spirit and – (he feels his head) – yes, completely bald.”

For some unaccountable reason the above words are quoted today as part of the TQF website banner heading!

The quote happens to be taken from my revised story (a story also obliquely referencing Stephen King in its last line) that was publicly shown very recently with the title of THE DUKE OF DUSK OR DAWN. It was originally published in the 1990s under the title NO CIRCUMSTANCES containing the same wording of the above quote in it.

9 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

9 responses to “Theaker’s Quarterly Fiction

  1. The TQF website banner has now replaced the above wording with: “I had a bad reaction to your public hobby writings.” A Pixies lyric.

    My past context to these apparent renewed attacks on me: https://nullimmortalis.wordpress.com/8249-2/.

  2. The TQF website banner quote has been changed again! It is now: “I should like to live here,” said Stephen. “I should like it now.”
    Don’t know what that’s about.

    =========================================
    My real-time reviews of TQF publications: Real-Time Review of TQF #37 & Real-Time Review of TQF #39 & Real-Time Review of TQF #40 & Real-Time Review of TQF #41 & Theaker’s Quarterly Fiction #43 & Theaker’s Quarterly #44.

  3. PS: regarding the public ‘past context’ page linked above, *everybody* who is interested enough is welcome to the current password. The password is only intended to disallow accidental searches finding certain pages of mine and to help keep this long-term issue to interested parties without too much disputatiousness. Meanwhile, I continue to try only to react not pro-act on this issue as can be seen above and on the ‘past context’ page.

  4. http://theakersquarterly.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/fifteen-things-to-consider-when-tempted.html
    So what does an author do when faced with an accidental typo dressed up by the reviewer as bad style? Or with post-aftermath abuse from the reviewer’s publisher which is nothing to do with the review itself or with the author’s original measured comments on the review?
    Just two examples of what happened to me.

  5. I have believed in the literary theory of ‘The Intentional Fallacy’ since I first encountered it in the mid 1960s. Whether I am right or wrong in this belief is, I accept, arguable but it is a sincere philosophy of mine. Not something to be covered briefly here. But what I will say, in the context of the Weirdtongue Palaver, is that this literary theory broadly suggests, inter alia, that once a book is posited in the audience arena, it then becomes the possession of all its readers, including its author who, I argue, has no more or no less fallibility, no more or no less rights, than any other reader. Hence my recent reviews or commentaries of some books for which I was responsible before they were posited in the audience arena, as well as my real-time reviewing since 2008 of “friends’” books such as those of Denis Diderot, John Cowper Powys, Thomas Mann, TQF etc.

    I am not swayed from such a life-long belief by buckling, for authorial self-interest, under any ‘political’ pressure of fashions that, we are told here, seem to apply to book reviews these days.

    And, as an aside, there can surely be no benefit to any author in keeping quiet about any reviews that cross a line of mockery or tendentiousness.

  6. “Thought 2” here: http://theakersquarterly.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/theakerly-thoughts-7-library-of.html

    I respectfully think my case is not a good template to base a theory on.
    The initial review, its context and the subsequent actions of myself and the TQF publisher (whatever the rights and wrongs) do not bode well for anyone believing this to be a typical situation from which to draw such conclusions.

    Also, a line is drawn not to make a review beyond the pale, but if a review is beyond the pale then the line is naturally drawn.

    BTW, I saw the Pixies on Jools Holland’s LATER last night on BBC2 – great stuff.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s