a place for zinesters - writers and readers
The ULA website has been down for the past year or two. Our members have been hit harder by the Depression than most people, probably, and so we couldn't afford the monthly Yahoo fee (yet our files are all in their proprietary code, ugh).
There are hundreds of reports and protests on the ULA website promoting zinesters and exposing the nefariousness of the 1%ers. It's a backlog of action on behalf of the 99%. We specifically had a lot of good OCCUPATION protests of the things like millionaire literary dinners where our guys would be thrown out for carrying placards pleading for the 99%. There are some good photos in there, too -- of tuxedoed 1%ers skulking past our "What about the starving artists?" protesters.
So, anyone want to see this good ol' website revived?
Anyone think the time is ripe for a renewed ULA?
Well, hey, whattaya know? I relaunched the ULA site! ...With all its lore on the interaction of underground art and the mainstream. (The two strongly inter-relate, doncha know!)
Thanks for the encouragement, everyone!
Why did I bother?
Well, ol' King Wenclas got a letter in the NYT about a reprint of an essay that attacked the ULA back in the day by Tom Bissell in "The Believer". This kicked in some fresh about our past global push for Literary Zinesters to be considered as real writers, their work worthy of being reviewed and considered in light of other writing styles.
I'm sure it makes people wonder why isn't there any fresh literary activism today. Especially in light of the Occupy Movement. Obviously, zinesters have their ghetto, as always, but today is a time of outreach and walls coming down.Genre is so passe'.
Did anyone notice how so many 1% writers bizarrely signed an "occupy writers" petition? Has this been properly exposed? It seems like there's still so much that could be done toward bringing the energy and content of zining into the anemic arena of mainstream Lit. It still could use a shot in the arm. The mainstream deserves a good cage rattling. When we see a major essay by Chad Harbach titled "We're all MFAs now" it makes ya wonder. He says there's a battle out there, b/w NYC and MFA. Kinda weird, doncha think, that DIY writers are left out. So it seems like there's still a lotta potential for fun, for calling these folks on their myopia.
Anyway, Bissell had labeled the ULA's call for the acceptance of folk/populist writing as literature a "Soviet" effort. Totally bizarre! And now his smearing essay is collected in a new book of his essays. Several major reviewers of this book piled on all over again, laughing at the "bad writers" of the ULA. The "badness" of our zinester writers was a given, never once examined, our books never reviewed. It was weird. Piling on was a fresh new gimme -- no one had to think about anything to join in the laffs. But I always have been grateful for Bissell for quoting a few small portions of our writings -- each one shines brightly, putting the lie to his slams. Certainly, it's a split universe that's exposed. Bissell's essay maunders aimlessly for pages without him ever reading our work, seemingly. However, certainly it isn't for everyone -- Ivy Leaguers might not appreciate much in the lives of zinesters (few depictions of therapists or nannies) but other people could. The ULA demands a widening of Lit, is all.
Anyway, things are stirring again.