beat list 1997

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:29:39 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: "R. Bentz Kirby" <bocelts@SCSN.NET>

Organization: Law Office of R. Bentz Kirby

Subject: Post on archives

I have not read this entire post yet by Rod Antsee and can not address

the question about Columbia University but the post states this:

The xeroxed letters, on the other hand, present a difficult problem --

entirely aside from any Sampas angle. In a way I am quite surprised, in

retrospect, that Martha Mayo agreed to purchase these in the first

place,

knowing that many of them (originals) are the property of other

libraries.

Just as an example, I have in front of me a xerox of part of an 8 April,

1952

letter from JK to AG. It's a xerox you must have sent to me, and it's

covered

with margin notes in your hand -- interesting, in and of themselves, as

pointers to the eventual text in MEMORY BABE -- but stamped on one edge

are

the following words:

<snip>

Rod:

I just posted to the list, or backchanneled some one about this. It is

my understanding that these "photocopies" were not "purchased" by

UMASS-Lowell. They were donated because Gerry could not sell them and

the purchase price was substantially reduced. So, if I am correct, we

should stop categorizing these letters as being purchased.

Gerry:

Can you comment on my position that the photocopied letters were not

sold and were donated? Am I correct? If not, please set me straight as

soon as possible.

Now, I will finish the post before sending and see if I have an idea on

the Columbia question.

>I even wonder if this wasn't one of the reasons that most other

insitutions you apporached

>were not interested?

Rod:

What is the factual basis for this statement? I am informed and believe

that there are several preeiment universities that would accept Gerry's

archives as is and open them to the public and preserve the tapes.

Please post the source of your comments. What universities have

expressed a lack of interest in Gerry's archives? What is the name of

the librarian? Do you have facts? If there is such a University, has

it or its librarian had contact with the Sampas family? Have they been

threatened by Sampas? I am not willing to accept a conclusory statement

like this by you about a great biographer. If you do not have facts to

back it up, you should not post things like this that could demean him

and his work. I am not intending this as a flame, but I have asked you

and others repeartedly to give me facts please. And I will continue to

search for them in your post.

Rod, you said:

>or any (alleged) Sampas interference in the running of the archive

>viv-a-vis scholarly access.

In an article I have from the Sun, by David Perry it is stated as either

facts or quotes from Martha Mayo:

"But since a Connecticut woman called the Morgan Center 18 months ago to

request that the public not be allowed to hear her interview with

Nicosia, the tapes have sat two steel file cabinet drawers."

1. Who is the woman and why did she call? What did she say? Does

she have the legal right to make this request? If she gave an interview

and knew that it might be published, there is no reason that Gerry can't

just publish all of these tapes as is and in toto. Then, no one can say

a thing about it.

Hey Gerry, what do you think about publishing all of the tapes. Call it

Nicosia's Watergate Tapes? Then it is out there and no one can say a

thing! Just a thought.

II.

" University policy requires that taped interviews in its archives must

have the written permission of the subject, or heirs, to be made

public. This rule also applies to transcriptions."

Again, if there is no law that requires this, then change the damn

policy or get the collection somewhere where this is not the policy.

III.

>From Mayo

"It was my understanding that permission was given. It was implicit

that had been done between the author and the people interviewed. But

people didn't know it would be placed in a public institution. I never

asked him if it had been done, and he didn't lie to me or anything. I

just ... believed it had been done."

The Connecticut caller -- whom Mayo declined to name -- "told me Gerry

had never gotten permission to include it," said Mayo, "or that the tape

would be available to the public ... . That's when we knew we had a

problem."

Mayo said two persons have since called to close off access to their

interviews. She also declined to name them.

.....

Mayo said there's little interest in the collection,

......

Because the Kerouac estate controls the copyright to Kerouac's writing,

visitors to the Mogan Center may read the letters in the collection and

may make notes from them, but may not photocopy them without estate

permission. Center director Mayo said Sampas approached her about two

years ago and told her of the copyright law.

"You can't go around copying people's letters without premission," said

Sampas. "I don't want all those letters flying around. They're all

copyrighted by the estate."

He's concerned that giving people free access to Kerouac's papers will

result in them appearing in "books and things--and that's ripping off

the estate. Anybody who wants a copy of any of those letters needs my

permission. That's standard procedure.

Now Rod, that is clear that Sampas has contacted the Lowell Mass library

and said that nobody may copy what, Jack's letters mailed to third

parties. Does the estate own copyright to that? I don't know, but I

intend to know real soon and when I have completed my research, I will

say that Sampas better own the rights to stop people from photocopying

these letters etc. Else, he may have interfered in other's rights to

access without having the right to do so.

And give me a break here. How can the head of a collection of a library

negotiate the purchase of a collection like this and not know if

permission has been granted to the author. Funny, Nicosia can still

publish every word on every tape and yet, I can't hear them because of

the policy of the Lowell library? Come on, I think we are being conned

here and I now intend to find out

Rod,

This article dated June 10, 1996 is just the library trying to make

Gerry out to be a bad guy. Nowhere do they cite a law or anything that

substantiates a thing she says. And she won't identify the persons.

Who are they? Why not id them? And what right of privacy do you have

to an interview that you gave in hopes that it would be published so all

the world could see that you knew Jack Kerouac? Again, this is not

right.

As the bard said years ago in Hamlet:

There is something rotten in Denmark.

Again, I do appreciate the fact that you agree with Gerry on the

maintenace of the tapes, I believe you yield too easily on the issue of

removal of such obstacles. If Sampas is wrong, then we all should tell

him to get out of others business.

Peace,

Gerry,

In addition to publishing all the tapes, and they be condensed to cd rom

so that the tapes can be sold with the book?

Bentz

bocelts@scsn.net

http://www.scsn.net/users/sclaw

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 09:30:29 -0500

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Judith Kampfner <judith@WELL.COM>

Subject: From Nick W-W re Letters

Comments: cc: nweir-w@nwu.edu

Borrowing my wife's e-mail as I'm not at work this Memorial Day...here's my

understanding re letters and libraries.

There are two very different issues at work here. One is copyright, the

other is the right to read material in a library. It is certainly true in

the US that copyright exists in letters and that you would need the

permission of both the sender and the recipient to use the letter in a

book, or to quote from it. The same would be true of audio interviews.

(this is not the case in, say, Germany, where we have our own dipute with

the Heidegger estate - if you think this one is nasty, believe me, you've

seen nothing. There the sender of the letter alone has copyright).

However, I don't think that's the real issue here, since we're talking

about access to reading the letters, not quoting them. Any library has a

right to restrict access to a valuable archive to bona-fide scholars or

whoever it wants, and once they have taken possession of an archive I guess

they can make their own rules. I think the permission business (them

claiming that in order to look at the letters you need permission clips) is

bogus though. But I will check next week with the Music Librarian here at

NU who can confirm this.

Gerry (if I may), I do think they're yanking your chain about the legality

of selling the letters to deflect you from your main point, and if I may

say so you do tend to jump at these distractions a bit easily. Most

libraries would welcome the oportunity to purchase a collection put

together for research purposes, and although you don't have copyright in

the pieces obviously, you have collected them and that in itself is a

bona-fide thing to sell. In the same way as a writer can claim copyright on

the selection and editing of a group of articles or essays even if they

don't have copyright in the actual articles.

I guess in your sale to UM Lowell you should have had them sign something

about open access and proper maintenance of the materials, both to stop

them deteriorating and stop them being stolen. It sounds from what you say

at best very sloppy and perhaps more suspicious than that - I'm very sorry

about it.

I will check up with the archive librarians here and report back. I hope

this doesn't confuse everyone even more.

And, Rinaldo, I don't think any of that Cage archive is on the web at all -

they're still working their way through it all. I will check up for you

though.

Nick W-W

Judith Kampfner

Midwest News and Features

3813 N. Alta Vista Terrace, Chicago IL 60613

ph 773 296 9590: fax 773 296 1692

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:49:33 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: "R. Bentz Kirby" <bocelts@SCSN.NET>

Organization: Law Office of R. Bentz Kirby

Subject: Nick, uh, I mean Judith, uhh nick

Nick,

Thanks for the comment on the right to use a letter. I am going to do

some research on that issue. How does fair use affect this copyright

rule? If you are correct, it may be that Sampas can prevent the library

from allowing copying for commercial reasons. But as to copying by a

scholar, then, can that not be allowed under fair use?

Sampas can sue anyone that uses copyrighted material for commercial use

in violation of the copyright laws. Publishers will not do that

anyway. That is not a real concern.

What is a real concern is who stole materials from Lowell and what has

Lowell done to get the material back?

Just a thought.

Peace,

Bentz

bocelts@scsn.net

http://www.scsn.net/users/sclaw

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:04:16 -0000

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: west <anwest@UP.NET>

Subject: Re: Bush

>Hillary, no, Bill yes,

Bentz, you really consider Bill beat? I always considered him more

not-quite beat.

west

I belong to the blank generation

and I can take or leave it each time

-Richard Hell

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:29:44 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Peter Milo <cva38@PROLOG.NET>

Organization: Micron Electronics, Inc.

Subject: Re: hello

Hi Amy

I'm sort of new on this list but the portable beat reader is a good

source on kerouac. In their they have the piece he wrote called "The

essentials of spontanous prose" or something like that which might be

helpful to you

Peater

(really Peter but this is a more individual spelling)

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:32:58 -0500

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: RACE --- <race@MIDUSA.NET>

Subject: Tears once again ....

Well, in something of a remembrance day ritual

i put on Lou Reed's Magic and Loss

and

screened through

slowly

the tribute page from

the Beat-L

at Literary Kicks.

Mayonaise Soda in my

water glass

kept me going

reading these words

once again

that i hadn't seen for

many

many months.

i was a babe to this list

when Allen died.

now the names connected

with the poems

and many

words of tribute

and Lou

somewhere deep in the

back of my brain ...

and then i got

to the first

post about

Allen's last phone call.

the line about how he always

cared about other folks feelings

so much

and the tears

streamed

down

from my eyes over my cheeks

and i could

hear Lou's music

of Eulogy

faintly in the

background...

the air conditioner

turns off

and the tears don't.

i slowly scroll

through the

rest of the page

type this note

and am heading outside

for a camel light

and some

sun.....

david rhaesa

salina kansas

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:00:02 -0700

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Gerald Nicosia <gnicosia@EARTHLINK.NET>

Subject: Re: Memory Babe Archive

>The xeroxed letters, on the other hand, present a difficult problem --

>entirely aside from any Sampas angle. In a way I am quite surprised, in

>retrospect, that Martha Mayo agreed to purchase these in the first place,

>knowing that many of them (originals) are the property of other libraries.

>Just as an example, I have in front of me a xerox of part of an 8 April, 1952

>letter from JK to AG. It's a xerox you must have sent to me, and it's covered

>with margin notes in your hand -- interesting, in and of themselves, as

>pointers to the eventual text in MEMORY BABE -- but stamped on one edge are

>the following words:

> " THIS IS A PHOTOCOPY OF ORIGINAL MATERIALS IN THE COLUMBIA

>UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES.

> This copy must be returned to Special Collections (801 Butler

>Library) at the completion of the reader's use."

>Whilst it's arguable, I guess, that you haven't, as yet, completed your use

>of this material, I'm pretty sure this statement on the document was actually

>put there to preclude you (anyone) from subsequently SELLING it, at some

>later date, to another institution --no? It renders your sale of such

>material to the library in Lowell in 1987 somewhat dodgy. I even wonder if

>this wasn't one of the reasons that most other insitutions you apporached

>were not interested? (I assume your archive included this material -- on p.

>35 of the list you sent me years ago, it lists "266 pages of letters of JK to

>Allen Ginsberg"--

Dear Rod, May 26, 1997

Boy, kiddo, you sure are trying to get back at me for revealing to

everyone on the Beat-List that you kaffee-klatsched with John Sampas and

bought up numerous pieces of the Kerouac archive for your own collection.

Let's stop lying here, Rod. I really am getting tired of it from

you guys.

What I sent you was a complete list of MY RESEARCH MATERIALS. It

was not a list of what I sold to U Mass, Lowell. NONE OF THE XEROXES OF

KEROUAC'S LETTERS TO GINSBERG WERE SOLD TO U MASS, LOWELL. IT WOULD HAVE

BEEN A VIOLATION OF MY AGREEMENT WITH COLUMBIA, AND I WAS WELL AWARE OF THAT.

NONE OF THE XEROXES I SOLD TO LOWELL WERE THE PROPERTY OF OTHER

LIBRARIES. GOT THAT?

(I used "sold" not to mean "sold" as you would sell peanuts on the

corner, as Chaput implies, but "sold" meaning they were within the huge body

of the MEMORY BABE archive, which was transferred en bloc to U Mass, Lowell,

for the sum of $7,500.)

It is also not true that "most other institutions I approached were

not interested." All of them were, including Bancroft at Berkeley, but at

the time Lowell had the best offer--not just in terms of money, but in terms

of what APPEARED TO BE accessibility to Kerouac scholars. I chose what

seemed the best university archive for my collection, and yes, money was a

part of the decision (just as money was a part of the decision for Ginsberg

in placing his collection at Stanford--you have a bone to pick with him

about that?).

Let's also tell the Beat List folk, since we're outing everything

here, how you happened to get a copy of that letter of Kerouac to Ginsberg

which I xeroxed (legally) from Columbia. You didn't send a private eye to

sleuth thru my collection. I voluntarily sent it to you to HELP YOU WITH A

SCHOLARLY ESSAY YOU WERE WRITING on the censorship and poor editing of

Kerouac's SELECTED LETTERS by Ann Charters. It was in the form of scholarly

assistance--which I have done for hundreds of other scholars on this planet,

FREE OF CHARGE.

Why don't you guys ever bring up all the hundreds of hours of my

time I'VE DONATED TO THE SCHOLARLY COMMUNITY--ALL THE LETTERS AND PHONE

CALLS I'VE ANSWERED FROM YOUNG PEOPLE AND STUDENTS WITH QUESTIONS, ALL THE

SPEAKING GIGS I'VE DONE FOR FREE, ETC.--INSTEAD OF ALL THIS SHIT YOU KEEP

POSTING ABOUT HOW MERCENARY I AM?

Moreover, you and Chaput keep dodging the main points I've been

making about Lowell's sudden arbitrary decision to close the archive (after

complaints from Sampas):

1) Kerouac letters are freely available to be read, studied, and to

have notes taken on them at every other major library that holds them.

2) Bancroft, Texas, and many other libraries have told me that they

would have no problem allowing access to the taped materials that were made

for use in my biography. If someone like John Sampas objected loudly enough

to his particular tapes being heard, they might remove those particular

tapes from the collection (out of courtesy) and RETURN THEM TO ME.

Lowell has not offered to return the complained-of tapes to me,

however.

Moreover, Lowell does not have to worry about losing its investment.

Several major libraries have offered to reimburse Lowell for their costs, in

order to get the collection out of Lowell, but the university also refuses

to sell (divest itself of) the collection.

I wonder how much fear of John Sampas has to do with that.

I.e., Lowell will NOT:

1) allow free access to the collection

2) properly care for the tapes and other materials

3) allow another library to buy them

YOU TELL ME WHAT IS GOING ON, MR. SMARTY PANTS ANSTEE. Only this time,

check your facts before you open your mouth.

Best always,

Gerry Nicosia

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 13:48:34 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Marie Countryman <country@SOVER.NET>

Subject: spontaneous sidewalk re-worked.

In-Reply-To: <v03007800afae4406b877@[156.46.45.10]>

thinking about kerouac

or,

spontaneous sidewalk

what is it with me, lately?

i keep buying books.

i'm poor

but would rather go hungry

than be hungry for words

i want to be a writer.

i read lots of writers

lots of poetry

lots of prose

lots of writers writing about writing

and critics who write about

them,

until i get to feeling like the quaker oats man

who is pictured on the label

holding another quaker box

with a little

quaker man, holding,

you know?

i mean, when does he ever eat the oatmeal?

i throw over my captors,

selfconsciouness and fear,

and break free

and up from the depths of my

inarticulate soul

the voices spoke to me of kerouac,

and

word sketches writ down in the moment.

now i stop all thought,

and, suddenly,

finally !

i am left with IT!

jack 's

spontaneous prose

writ in humble small pad

full of word sketches

novels

poetry

prose

and

emboldened,

out i go, tiny pad in pocket

looking avidly for

the perfect

poetic moment

to capture in words,

a stupenousllyspontaenously

experience of IT

and so, i go, casting

eyes to sky

and down to

earth

& cement.

i walk quite a bit,

and then further.

no epiphanies.

my pad begins to sweat.

i stop.

and then i look about.

i am standing

in the midst

of a cheery

hop scotch

scrawled in blue chalk.

i had my note pad ready

to capture it all,

a fine lot of writing

to be done in the moment,

a frenzy of scribbling

of making it new,

until, quite suddenly,

despite lingering winter chill

i stood enveloped in the warmth of

twilight days

of summer.

mothers' voices on the breeze

giving last call for play

with

just

one

game

of hop scotch,

marbles, jumprope

kick the can ... (allly ally outs in free.....

voices called out

in my mind)

on a sunlit afternoon this spring

i stood in twilight summer haze

feeling once again

dirty hands and sticky faces,

bare feet on dewy grass...

touch

taste

sight

sounds

alive!

i stood before the chalked outlines

scribbling furiously.

ithen dashed off

to read my pocket ful of

sketched

impressions,

literary

allusions,

and all things real with potency.

yes, i feel like a real poet now.

as i

sit down excitedly

to transcribe my notes

and fashion a pome.

i open my notebook :

no words at all,

only the sketch

of hopscotch blocks,

blue chalk and all.

@mc/517/97

revised 5/26/97

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 14:02:28 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Pamela Beach Plymell <CVEditions@AOL.COM>

Subject: Re: Tony's Story and Gerry's

Gerry:

What a great story. Karma indeed.

Pam Plymell

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 14:11:25 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: "R. Bentz Kirby" <bocelts@SCSN.NET>

Organization: Law Office of R. Bentz Kirby

Subject: Gerry's reply

I have now read Gerry's reply. I have a couple of follow up questions

and comments here. First, it appears that I was wrong to assume that

the letters from Columbia were "donated" to Lowell. Apparently, they

were not sold either. They were not sent to Lowell by Gerry at all!

So, that leads to more questions for Rod Anstee:

Exactly what is your point here Rod, Why did you make a post to this

list designed to imply that Gerry had done something improper. To

avoid confusion, you said:

Rod Anstee wrote:

> Gerry, I think you are on more solid ground with this issue than the

> other.

> There are huge chunks of your archive that are irreplaceable --

> especially

> the tape recordings, which must be preserved at all costs, even if the

> actual

> access/rights issue isn't sorted out for years to come. Preserve the

> tapes at

> least!

> (ASIDE: I can, for example, see that someone who had granted you an

> interview back in the mid-1970's, might now be a bit

> surprised/troubled to

> discover that the entire interview was potentially now available in

> complete

> form, either audio or transcript, to the public -- that is, I can

> realize

> that one of your interviewees might not have forseen such an

> eventuality when

> they originally granted the interview as part of helping you with your

> book.

> I say, I can sort of SEE someone feeling that way, though I imagine

> most of

> the interviewees don't care either way, and if asked would readily

> grant

> permission. I am thinking of someone like Helen Weaver, for example,

> who

> might very well be writing her own memoirs of her time with JK, and

> therefore

> not feel comfortable -- I pick Helen W. just as an hypothetical

> example

> though, you understand.)

> The original letters, too, even in 1987 deserved extra special

> treatment, and

> it's appalling to think that they have somehow been allowed to

> disappear into

> the void. (See, we can/do agree on some things!)

> The xeroxed letters, on the other hand, present a difficult problem --

> entirely aside from any Sampas angle. In a way I am quite surprised,

> in

> retrospect, that Martha Mayo agreed to purchase these in the first

> place,

> knowing that many of them (originals) are the property of other

> libraries.

> Just as an example, I have in front of me a xerox of part of an 8

> April, 1952

> letter from JK to AG. It's a xerox you must have sent to me, and it's

> covered

> with margin notes in your hand -- interesting, in and of themselves,

> as

> pointers to the eventual text in MEMORY BABE -- but stamped on one

> edge are

> the following words:

> " THIS IS A PHOTOCOPY OF ORIGINAL MATERIALS IN THE COLUMBIA

> UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES.

> This copy must be returned to Special Collections (801 Butler

> Library) at the completion of the reader's use."

> Whilst it's arguable, I guess, that you haven't, as yet, completed

> your use

> of this material, I'm pretty sure this statement on the document was

> actually

> put there to preclude you (anyone) from subsequently SELLING it, at

> some

> later date, to another institution --no? It renders your sale of such

> material to the library in Lowell in 1987 somewhat dodgy. I even

> wonder if

> this wasn't one of the reasons that most other insitutions you

> apporached

> were not interested? (I assume your archive included this material --

> on p.

> 35 of the list you sent me years ago, it lists "266 pages of letters

> of JK to

> Allen Ginsberg"-- and I assume that comparable letters, from other

> libraries

> came with similar restrictions.)

> I guess I'm just suggesting that, in some respects at least, some of

> the

> content of your MB archive is rather problematical, legally speaking.

> Of

> course this in no way excuses any mishandling of the remainder of the

> archive, or any (alleged) Sampas interference in the running of the

> archive

> viv-a-vis scholarly access.

> Just a thought. CHEERS Rod

I.I am thinking of someone like Helen Weaver, for example, whomight very

well be writing her own memoirs of her time with JK, and therefore

not feel comfortable -- I pick Helen W. just as an hypothetical example

though, you understand.

Question:

Now Rod, Is Helen Weaver a real person? Do you know her? Where does

she live? Has she ever called the library at Lowell to tell them not to

allow access to her tapes? If she is a real person, why would you use

her name in a hypothetical? It appears that if Helen Weaver is a real

person then you may in fact have knowledge of her intentions. Why not

just say that Joan Doe may be writing a book?

II:

The xeroxed letters, on the other hand, present a difficult problem --

entirely aside from any Sampas angle. In a way I am quite surprised, in

retrospect, that Martha Mayo agreed to purchase these in the first

place,

knowing that many of them (originals) are the property of other

libraries.

Just as an example, I have in front of me a xerox of part of an 8 April,

1952

letter from JK to AG. It's a xerox you must have sent to me, and it's

covered

with margin notes in your hand -- interesting, in and of themselves, as

pointers to the eventual text in MEMORY BABE -- but stamped on one edge

are

the following words:

" THIS IS A PHOTOCOPY OF ORIGINAL MATERIALS IN THE COLUMBIA

UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES.

This copy must be returned to Special Collections (801 Butler

Library) at the completion of the reader's use."

Rod:

You have posted to this list two facts:

1. That Martha Mayo purchased this letter despite the restrictions on

the face of the letter.

2. That Gerry Nicosia sold it to the Library despite the restrictions

on the face of the letter.

Questioins:

This implys, no states, that they have both violated the law. Is the

letter of which you speak in the collection at Lowell? Does it have

Gerry's notes on it? Was it sold to Lowell? If not, when will you post

your apology to both Martha Mayo and Gerry? For your information, I am

printing out a copy of your post and mailing it to Martha Mayo and will

ask her to respond to me in writing that I can reproduce and post here

to clarify this issue. I will send her both of my posts as well. I

will not send her Gerry's. I will post the letter to the list when it

is written. I don't have her address but assume that I can get it.

III.

Whilst it's arguable, I guess, that you haven't, as yet, completed your

use

of this material, I'm pretty sure this statement on the document was

actually

put there to preclude you (anyone) from subsequently SELLING it, at some

later date, to another institution --no? It renders your sale of such

material to the library in Lowell in 1987 somewhat dodgy.

Question:

Was this letter sold to Lowell? Was the sale to Lowell in any way

whatsoever "dodgy" and if so, in what way and specifically please?

Rod you say a lot and yet, I see nothing but your conclusions without

any supporting facts. It seems as if you are saying negative things

about Gerry but in a way that you can try to claim later that they were

"honest" mistakes and not intended to defame him. But if your

conclusion that he sold the restricted materials to Lowell is not true,

then you have already, in my opinon defamed both he and Martha Mayo and

with what proof. I await your public response. I don't know if Gerry

sold them or not, but that is why I am writing Martha Mayo.

IV.

(I assume your archive included this material -- on p.

35 of the list you sent me years ago, it lists "266 pages of letters of

JK to

Allen Ginsberg"-- and I assume that comparable letters, from other

libraries

came with similar restrictions.)

Question:

Why would you make say this without knowing? Now you have said that

Gerry has sold other restricted materials. Man, what is going on in

your mind. If you are wrong, this is terrible. If you are right, why

don't you come right out and say, I have been to Lowell and reviewed the

collection, Gerry sold these letters from Columbia etc and they are

items 1,2,3 etc of the collection? Where is the proof to back this up

man?

I know the internet is a great place to exchange ideas, but to make

these accusations and then say, well I assumed this, well you should not

do that.

Come forth with facts or leave this thread alone Rod. It is not right

to accuse by innuendo.

And while we are on the subject, Rod, you admitted that the letter you

got was from Gerry.

>Just as an example, I have in front of me a xerox of part of an 8

April, 1952

>letter from JK to AG. It's a xerox you must have sent to me, and it's

covered

>with margin notes in your hand -- interesting, in and of themselves, as

>pointers to the eventual text in MEMORY BABE --

Why did Gerry send this to you? Did you request his assistance? Were

you working on a project? Has Gerry ever answered any questions from

you?

If Gerry sent that to you in private correspondence, then I personally

can have no respect for you. In the South we live by a code, and it may

be antiquated, but you never, never take something obtained in

friendship and use it against that friend. That is as low as you can

get down here. Maybe where you come from, that is ok, but not in my

book. And by the way, I have done my homework and know where and how

you got it, so if you respond, then make sure it is truthful.

As I said, I am going to do the legal research and will report my

findings.

Peace,

Bentz

bocelts@scsn.net

http://www.scsn.net/users/sclaw

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:20:15 -0700

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Gerald Nicosia <gnicosia@EARTHLINK.NET>

Subject: Post on Archives

May 26, 1997 MEMORIAL DAY

This post is in response to the long post by Bentz Kirby:

Dear Bentz,

It's Memorial Day, and I'd rather be finishing up my book on the

healing of Vietnam veterans, who are one of the greatest bunch of guys I've

ever known (they'd don't backbite and lie, they don't pretend to be your

friend when they're not, they have a great passion for justice, and they

call 'em like they see 'em). But instead the bullshit's still flying here,

and so I've got to keep shoveling it.

Mr. Anstee writes a very cool, calm, and collected post. He's not a

hot-headed dago like I am. But that doesn't mean there isn't a shitload of

malice behind what he writes.

Mr. Anstee was taking whacks at me behind my back, calling me

"worse" than Sampas, before I even got on the Beat-List. What is really

curious about this is that Mr. Anstee has written and acted, to my face, as

if he were my friend for the past 13 or so years (excuse me if I'm one or

two years off). In return, I helped him on a whole variety of projects,

provided him with dozens of pieces of Beat and Kerouac memorabilia, etc.

Where that malice came from, I don't know, other than perhaps Mr.

Anstee felt vulnerable in that he had revealed to me how much of Jack

Kerouac's archive he had bought for his own collection. And now that I move

legally closer to recovering rights in Kerouac materials for the Kerouac

Estate, perhaps I seem like a threat to him--i.e., perhaps he fears if I win

in Florida, he will have to surrender the Kerouac items he has paid good

money for, because that would mean they were not legally John Sampas's to

have sold.

In any case, let's answer some of your questions:

1) "Does anyone actually know what Sampas has done [with regard to

selling off Kerouac items and artifacts]? Yes, many people have testified

to this. I have a seven-page list of witnesses and testimony, which I will

provide to you off-line, if you wish, since it may be needed for evidence in

court. Certainly dealer Jeffrey Weinberg, who handled the archive for

Sampas from 1991-1993 and who is on the Beat-List, has not contested the

majority of my allegations [he only claimed the price of the raincoat was

less than $50,000].

We keep hearing the myth that Sampas sold the Kerouac Archive to the

New York Public Library. I plan to demolish that myth once for all later

today. But let me just post one curious fact here. Jeffrey Weinberg states

that he sold the manuscript of Kerouac's BOOK OF DREAMS (as agent for Mr.

Sampas) to a private collector. I have every reason to believe him.

As far as I'm concerned, Mr. Weinberg is one of the most honest

people on this list. I say this, not because we are friends. We have never

met. And in fact, we've crossed swords with each other more than a few

times over the past 20 years (angry letters exchanged, angry phone calls).

But Mr. Weinberg is an okay guy in my book. Every time we have

talked on the phone, he has talked straight with me. He has only revealed

the names of his customers who were willing to be revealed, but he has told

me of hundreds of items that were sold.

Somehow, when all this controversy arose, the BOOK OF DREAMS

manuscript ended up in the New York Public Library--so that John Sampas

could use it as evidence that he has all along been selling stuff there, and

will someday sell everything there.

But how did BOOK OF DREAMS get from the private collector Weinberg

sold it to (in his capacity as Sampas's agent) to the New York Public Library?

Did Sampas go and buy it back from the collector and then resell it

to the NYPL? Just a thought, one of the many mysteries that will not be

explained till Sampas openly reveals what he has done WITH EVERY SINGLE ITEM

OF JACK KEROUAC'S ARCHIVE.

2) Did I donate part of my collection to U Mass, Lowell? Well, that's a

moot point. My archive was appraised at the time at $15,000--an amount no

library was then able to offer for it. I might well have made that much

money selling my archive off piece by piece, but I chose not to do that, not

to destroy its scholarly value in that fashion.

When U Mass, Lowell, said they could only come up with $7,500, I

agreed to that price, saying I would make the other half a donation. I also

allowed the university to spread the payments out over three years, to make

it easier for them to acquire the archive. However, we never actually drew

up donation papers. And even if we had, since I was simply donating part of

the appraised value, it would be arbitrary to say which items were "donated"

and which were "sold." But no xerox that was owned by another library was

included in the body of material that was finally transferred to U Mass, Lowell.

3) "What is the factual basis for this statement [by Mr. Anstee, that most

other institutions I approached were not interested in the MEMORY BABE

archive]?" There is no factual basis. Every single library I talked

to--and there were many--wanted the archive, but several of them wanted it

for free, which I simply couldn't afford to do back in 1986. Now, several

libraries have offered to pay Lowell good money to give up the

archive--since Lowell acts as if they have no use for it. One library--I'm

not at liberty to say which--even told me they were "salivating" at the

prospect of getting it.

4) "Who is the woman [from Connecticut] and why did she call?" We should

call her the No Name Woman, since librarian Martha Mayo refuses to name her.

I was first apprised of the fact that the MEMORY BABE archive was closed by

a post card in June, 1995, from scholar/writer/teacher Jim Jones. On the

post card, Mr. Jones wrote: "I just tried to look at the papers you donated

to the University of Lowell and the librarian in the Mogan Center told me

your collection is closed to the public until the lawsuit [Jan Kerouac vs.

the Sampases] is resolved."

I called librarian Martha Mayo, and she told me "someone" had come

in to complain. After much prodding, she finally confessed that the person

was John Sampas. Only later, after I had made a big stink claiming John

Sampas did not have a legal right to close my collection, did Mayo change

her story--she has in fact changed it several times already--and claim there

was another caller, "the woman from Connecticut." She has thus far declined

to name her. Mr. Anstee speculates it is Helen Weaver--a writer and lover

of Kerouac's from Connecticut, but no, it is not Helen Weaver. And it is

not Ann Charters, who lives in Storrs, because I didn't interview Ann on tape.

Later still, Mayo claimed that several people had called. But when

I pushed her on this point, last fall in Lowell, she came back to the story

that there were only two people, one of whom was John Sampas, and the other

was the No Name Woman from Connecticut.

5) "What do you think about publishing all the tapes?" It's a great

idea, esp. on CD-ROM, but we'd have to get them out of Lowell first, since I

didn't keep copies. I was too poor at the time to copy 25,000 pieces of

paper and 300 tapes. I have, however, published a few of the interviews in

literary magazines, and nobody ever claimed I didn't have the legal right to

do so.

6) Ms. Mayo--she who cannot keep her stories straight--claims it was

her "understanding that permission was given." First of all, I didn't

negotiate with Martha Mayo, I negotiated with Collections Acquisition

Librarian Dick Ross for a full year (he was above Mayo in the U Mass

hierarchy). Ross and I had numerous conversations over the course of a

year, before the sale was made, and all my cards were out on the table about

the fact that there were no written permissions. Writers who turn over

their literary collections to a university ALMOST NEVER have the kind of

permissions Mayo is talking about. Ferlinghetti has put materials from

thousands of people into his City Lights Archive at Bancroft in Berkeley,

including 20 letters from a guy named Gerry Nicosia, and you can see all

that material tomorrow despite the fact that there is no written permission

to do so (nobody ever asked this Gerry Nicosia guy for his permission).

7) "Does the estate own copyright to that [Kerouac's letters]?" Yes,

the copyright of a letter reverts to the sender, while the physical property

is owned by the recipient. That means John Sampas legally owns the

people from reading those letters if they are in a public institution?

ABSOLUTELY NOT. Does it give him the right to prevent scholars from

photocopying those letters for personal use? That is a moot point, an area

that is currently under debate. Some lawyers will say, yes, xerox is a form

of publication, and Sampas lawfully controls publication. Other lawyers

will say xerox of a single copy is not publication. Different libraries

have different policies, and the policies are changing all the time.

But at present there are a number of libraries I can walk into

tomorrow and xerox Kerouac letters, including Bancroft at Berkeley. This

despite the fact that Sampas has called some of these libraries, including

Bancroft, to complain about such things.

8) "If Sampas is wrong, then we all should tell him to get out of others

business." Amen, and out of the business of trying to control and limit

Kerouac scholarship.

Best always, Gerry Nicosia

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 14:25:06 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Antoine Maloney <stratis@ODYSSEE.NET>

Subject: to Kirby

Kirby - I took out the "and other arsonists" out of the title...i'm less

peeved now!

You know, Kirby, in England they have a very fine legal concept of

distinguishimg the Solicitor, who establishes the case - tort, defense, etc.

- and he Barrister, who fights it in court withthe assistance at table of

the solicitor. It pisses me off to see you taking the role of Barrister with

regardto Rod's post and ladling on the vitriol and gasoline to really stoke

things up.

The points made were made in a calm and reasoned way. I know that

Rod and Gerry are seen to be at odds, but if everyone from the two of them

to you and to me would just cool it and act nice, we could still discuss

things, throw light into the corners and - if not agree - at least stop

trying to hate each other and piss each other off...

..and I apologize for pissing you off, but try to be more neutral in

all this. it's not necessary to take sides. Cimino has said it often enough

that the idea should be to protect and open access to the archives. I swear

that after listening to all this stuff, I am going - at minimum - to visit

New York to see what's there...and maybe I'll go bug Mayo in Lowell!

Having started with the legal eagle baloney (maloney?) I ask also

that all the talk of suits, counter-suits, fraud, malfeasance, theft, and

various other skullduggery be left off the list - unless of course it's

really juicy stuff, in which case Carry On!

One final point in support of one of Rod's points; it's critical to

move quickly on any audio tape recordings in Gerry's or anyone elses's

archive that ar more than 15 years old. There is likely to already be

evidence of degradation and after 25 years you risk being left with tape hiss!

Antoine

Voice contact at (514) 933-4956 in Montreal

"An anarchist is someone who doesn't need a cop to tell him what to do!"

-- Norman Navrotsky and Utah Phillips

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 14:37:40 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: "R. Bentz Kirby" <bocelts@SCSN.NET>

Organization: Law Office of R. Bentz Kirby

Subject: Re: to Kirby

Antoine Maloney wrote:

> Kirby - I took out the "and other arsonists" out of the title...i'm

> less

> peeved now!

> You know, Kirby, in England they have a very fine legal

> concept of

> distinguishimg the Solicitor, who establishes the case - tort,

> defense, etc.

> - and he Barrister, who fights it in court withthe assistance at table

> of

> the solicitor. It pisses me off to see you taking the role of

> Barrister with

> regardto Rod's post and ladling on the vitriol and gasoline to really

> stoke

> things up.

> The points made were made in a calm and reasoned way. I know

> that

> Rod and Gerry are seen to be at odds, but if everyone from the two of

> them

> to you and to me would just cool it and act nice, we could still

> discuss

> things, throw light into the corners and - if not agree - at least

> stop

> trying to hate each other and piss each other off...

> ..and I apologize for pissing you off, but try to be more

> neutral in

> all this. it's not necessary to take sides. Cimino has said it often

> enough

> that the idea should be to protect and open access to the archives. I

> swear

> that after listening to all this stuff, I am going - at minimum - to

> visit

> New York to see what's there...and maybe I'll go bug Mayo in Lowell!

> Having started with the legal eagle baloney (maloney?) I ask

> also

> that all the talk of suits, counter-suits, fraud, malfeasance, theft,

> and

> various other skullduggery be left off the list - unless of course

> it's

> really juicy stuff, in which case Carry On!

> One final point in support of one of Rod's points; it's

> critical to

> move quickly on any audio tape recordings in Gerry's or anyone elses's

> archive that ar more than 15 years old. There is likely to already be

> evidence of degradation and after 25 years you risk being left with

> tape hiss!

> Antoine

> Voice contact at (514) 933-4956 in Montreal

> "An anarchist is someone who doesn't need a cop to tell him what

> to do!"

> -- Norman Navrotsky and Utah Phillips

Antoine:

Understand that I do not yet represent Gerry. But, the way these posts

are coming is disturbing. He is a great biographer and his work,

including interviews is in danger of being lost. He does not need to

defend his work to accusations that are not backed by facts.

I am investigating assisting him on the Lowell matter and what can be

done to preserve the tapes. That is all so far.

My point here was not to be threatening, but to make sure that people

understand that you just can not make posts like this that imply he has

done something wrong and has ilegally sold materials that were

restricted, unless you are right.

Why was the post just, hey the tapes need to be saved, lets do it. The

rest could be done back channel. Rod had Gerry's number, he can call,

write or backchannel. We don't need people making statements like this

unless they are true and are substantiated. I do not want to lose Gerry

from this list because of such stuff!!

Thanks and I will take your advice and see where it leads. On the other

hand, I am not going to sit back and let others attack Gerry and leave

him out to twist. Rod, stick to the good stuff, or what you know.

Thanks

Peace,

Bentz

bocelts@scsn.net

http://www.scsn.net/users/sclaw

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 14:49:25 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Julie Hulvey <JHulvey@AOL.COM>

Subject: Re: Frank O'Hara, a poetry.

Rinaldo:

I just borrowed Frank O'Hara's Collected Poetry and plan on dipping into it

today.

Very likely I will find out why I am not a poet.

Julie

a painter who thinks she would rather be a poet, but she is not

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 12:51:45 -0600

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: "Derek A. Beaulieu" <dabeauli@FREENET.CALGARY.AB.CA>

Organization: Calgary Free-Net

Subject: Re: spontaneous sidewalk re-worked.

In-Reply-To: <l03020903afaf35490ac4@[206.25.67.120]>

i read a

lot (& his wife)

of authors writing about

the end of

caps

capitals

capitalism

captives

all they can

see seeing

critics

writing about

only

themselves

& the end of

their

nose.

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:59:42 -0700

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Gerald Nicosia <gnicosia@EARTHLINK.NET>

Subject: Re: Gerry's reply

>Now Rod, Is Helen Weaver a real person? Do you know her? Where does

>she live? Has she ever called the library at Lowell to tell them not to

>allow access to her tapes? If she is a real person, why would you use

>her name in a hypothetical? It appears that if Helen Weaver is a real

>person then you may in fact have knowledge of her intentions. Why not

>just say that Joan Doe may be writing a book?

GOOD QUESTION, BENTZ. HELEN WEAVER IS A FRIEND OF MINE, AND IT WAS NOT SHE

WHO CALLED U MASS, LOWELL TO COMPLAIN ABOUT HER TAPE BEING ACCESSIBLE. I

HAVE HER ADDRESS AND CAN PROVIDE IT TO YOU OFFLINE, IF YOU NEED IT. MR.

ANSTEE HERE WAS CLEARLY USING A SPECIFIC NAME OF A 'WOMAN IN CONNECTICUT' TO

GIVE MORE CREDIBILITY TO HIS ARGUMENT.

>II:

>2. That Gerry Nicosia sold it to the Library despite the restrictions

>on the face of the letter.

>Questioins:

>This implys, no states, that they have both violated the law. Is the

>letter of which you speak in the collection at Lowell? Does it have

>Gerry's notes on it? Was it sold to Lowell? If not, when will you post

>your apology to both Martha Mayo and Gerry? For your information, I am

>printing out a copy of your post and mailing it to Martha Mayo and will

>ask her to respond to me in writing that I can reproduce and post here

>to clarify this issue. I will send her both of my posts as well. I

>will not send her Gerry's. I will post the letter to the list when it

>is written. I don't have her address but assume that I can get it.

MARTHA MAYO IS SPECIAL COLLECTIONS LIBRARIAN AT U MASS, LOWELL, C/O THE

MOGAN CENTER, 40 FRENCH STREET, LOWELL MASSACHUSETTS 01854. SHE'S ALSO ON

THE INTERNET BUT I DON'T HAVE HER EMAIL ADDRESS. SHE'S NOT TOO MUCH OF A

FAN OF GERALD NICOSIA, ESPECIALLY AFTER I FILED A POLICE REPORT REVEALING

THAT SHE HAD ALLOWED 60 RARE LETTERS TO BE STOLEN FROM THE MEMORY BABE

COLLECTION, BUT I ALSO EXPECT SHE WILL NOT PRETEND THE LETTERS ROD ALLUDES

TO ARE IN HER POSSESSION, WHEN I HAVE PROOF THEY ARE NOT.

In the South we live by a code, and it may

>be antiquated, but you never, never take something obtained in

>friendship and use it against that friend. That is as low as you can

>get down here. Maybe where you come from, that is ok, but not in my

>book. And by the way, I have done my homework and know where and how

>you got it, so if you respond, then make sure it is truthful.

>--

>Bentz

>bocelts@scsn.net

>http://www.scsn.net/users/sclaw

I live by the same code, and it has been one of the shocks of my

life during this whole Kerouac Vs. Sampas affair to find how many people I

have helped have stabbed me in the back, including Ann Charters. And how

much of it seems to be connected to making money off of/with help from John

Sampas.

In 1988, when the Kerouac Commemorative was dedicated in Lowell, the

Sampas family and their allies, who were running the ceremony and

festivities, chose to invite neither Jan Kerouac nor any of the Kerouac

biographers. Brad Parker, who had an independent group (Lowell Corporation

for the Humanities, much at odds with the "official" Lowell Kerouac

Committee) invited me and provided money for me to come to Lowell to speak

during that celebration. I told Brad Parker that he should also invite Ann

Charters, and he did. That's how Ann got to Lowell, and got to meet John

Sampas. Three years later, after Stella Sampas died and John took over, he

hired Ann to provide consultation regarding the Kerouac archives and to

begin a series of lucrative editing projects, which continues to this very day.

However, in 1994, Ann Charters, who was one of the chairs of NYU's

Beat conference, did her best to see that I was not invited; and when I

finally did come (at Jan Kerouac's insistence) I was not given the airfare

and free room at the University Suites that all the other participants got

(including Charters herself and even Gregory Corso's children, who were not

actually participants but just there to lend moral support). In 1995, when

NYU did a KEROUAC CONFERENCE, which listed Charters' name at the top of the

program, Ann claimed to me she knew nothing about the conference till a week

before the programs were sent out. When I asked to be invited, I was

completely stonewalled, and when I showed up anyway and paid my $120 to get

in (as Jan herself had to do), I was removed by police for defending Jan

Kerouac's right to speak there. When I asked Ann if she thought this was

right, she said, "I know nothing about it."

Thanks a lot, Ann.

Thanks a lot, Rod.

Thanks a lot, Paul Maher, for my going to the Lowell District

Attorney to tell him you WERE MOST LIKELY NOT THE MEMORY BABE ARCHIVE THIEF,

after Martha Mayo claimed (without evidence) that you were.

Et tu, Brutus?

Still not giving up on friendship, Gerry Nicosia

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 13:01:36 -0600

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: "Derek A. Beaulieu" <dabeauli@FREENET.CALGARY.AB.CA>

Organization: Calgary Free-Net

Subject: Re: Frank O'Hara, a poetry.

In-Reply-To: <970526144924_-1866894138@emout17.mail.aol.com>

> Julie

> a painter who thinks she would rather be a poet, but she is not

julie

can understand that completely. trying to convince myself of many things

that i am (may be) not (or maybe just not yet, who knows?) - painter,

artist, printmaker, student, worker, drone, individual, poet, eternal

teahead of time (like proust?)

challenge, isnt it?

yrs

derek

a pinocchio who thinks he would rather be a real boy, but he is not.

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 15:46:11 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Paul Maher <mapaul@PIPELINE.COM>

Subject: Re: Gerry's reply

> Thanks a lot, Paul Maher, for my going to the Lowell District

>Attorney to tell him you WERE MOST LIKELY NOT THE MEMORY BABE ARCHIVE THIEF,

>after Martha Mayo claimed (without evidence) that you were.

> Et tu, Brutus?

"Brutus hath rived my heart:

>A friend should bear his friend's infirmities,

But Brutus makes mine greater than they are."

Gerry-

Am I to be indentured to your servitude because you salvaged my

reputation in the face of the law? I neither sought nor earned your aid. I

never solicited your aid, endorsed your cause, nor have I ever even met you

face to face nor will I ever want to in the future. You are a scourge upon

serious Kerouac scholarship, you are a blight to academia, and you and your

unsophisticated ways will some day reap what you sow. Your insignificant

presence does not warrant any fear in my heart nor will it ever. I paid my

price for my CRIME and it in more ways than one changed my life for the

better. I am

REAL AND IN TOUCH WITH MY REALITY. Creative freedom has always been the

cornerstone of my existence and the mother of all my inventions. You, Mr.

Nicosia, play no part in this. You do not have a monopoly on Kerouac

scholarship. You create the vendettas that are employed against you and then

you use this as a forum for "us against them." Mr. Sampas, (if you insist

there are "sides" to this foolish drama)demonstrates maturity and

professionalism in his role as literary executor. You, on the other hand, do

not even demonstrate a level-handed approach to scholarship. You use Memory

Babe as your pulpit when a good amount of the material is plagued with gross

inaccuracies and poor

documentation. yes, my pen can indeed be as poisonous as yours but that is

not what I am about. You play no part in my daily but as a flea on an

elephant's ass. You are a fly on a mountain of shit. it's too bad you and

your devout followers (if you have any) missed Hale-Bopp..............last

on this....EVER. PAUL MAHER JR. THE GUY WHO STOLE BOOKS FROM MOGAN CENTER

LIBRARY BUT IS NOW THE SCAPEGOAT FOR GERRY NICOSIA'S WORTHLESS STOLEN

ARCHIVES....

=========================================================================

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 16:32:29 -0400

Reply-To: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

Sender: "BEAT-L: Beat Generation List" <BEAT-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

From: Peter Milo <cva38@PROLOG.NET>

Organization: Micron Electronics, Inc.

Subject: who is your dad? and letter to kerouac

I'm a lurker turning active now. I have a quick question for phil who

is your dad is mentioned in any of Kerouac's books or any such thing?

It seems that a lot of people here have known each other for years

through families even. I never met any of the beats but I was going to

try to meet Ginsburg and as luck has it the year I'm moving back to New

York he dies.

One more question a few months ago around febuary there was this site it

was one a narrative I forgot the author's name but it was called "letter

to kerouac" I liked a lot and I printed it out I lost that copy and the

site is off of the net so does any one know the author's email address

so I can get a copy?

thanks a lot

Peater

(really spelled Peter but this spelling is more individual)