No art without art, no text without text.
- No mention of institutional affiliation.
- No discussion of the publishing industry.
- No discussion of academia or academic careers.
- No attacks on critical theory.
- No arguments with or over print media.
- No blog triumphalism.
- No “literary” vs. “non-literary” classifications.
- No arguments from authority.
- No false objectivity.
- No aping of academic prose styles.
- No aping of popular prose styles.
- No smugness.
- No discussion of this manifesto.
[Thanks to EW for the title and JBF for the runner-up.]
10 May 2007 at 10:49
cool. I’m in.
10 May 2007 at 13:50
Philosophy of Waggish? I don’t know what to make of these rules.
10 May 2007 at 22:05
Attention all commenters on this post: you are in violation of rule #13 and will be summarily deleted.
Except for me. Because this is a meta-comment. Meta-commenters allowed.
12 May 2007 at 06:18
since when is an affirmation a discussion?
13 May 2007 at 11:43
No comment.
13 May 2007 at 11:46
In avoiding Rule 13, any such affirmation would be forced to violate Rule 12 and possibly Rule 8.
This analysis is offered with the caveat that it violates Rule 9.
4 June 2007 at 01:34
I propose: #14. No nostalgia about the “smell of books” or laments about the decline of reading.