eNewsChannels BOOK SERIAL: “Secret Sex, A Book Alive Online,” written and lived by John Scott G: Chapter 47 – “Say What?.”
Q: Do you understand why some people think you’re crazy for writing “Secret Sex“?
A: Different words come to mind.
Q: Such as?
A: Daring and provocative. And egomaniacal.
Q: I see. Do you feel you made the right decision to have it published?
A: Sure, probably. Talking truth about men and women is good and fun. Calling out the greedwhore conservatives is necessary by anyone with an IQ above eighty. And the folderol of religion is never discussed enough in intelligent society.
Q: All right, but let me read the list: A) discussing the problems of the male/female dynamic; B) calling out conservatives; C) exposing faults of the Human Resources industry; D) making fun of your meal tickets, advertising and public relations; E) bashing religion; F) speaking truth to power; G) revealing so much about so many of the people you’ve met in your life; H) onanism; and I) discussing your molestation.
A: Well, that sounds good to me. And best of all, everything is based on actual events.
Q: So you’re fine with any fallout from all this?
A: Yup.
Q: All right, moving on. What do you hope to accomplish with this book?
A: Oodles of things.
Q: Do tell.
A: First, a lot of what I’ve been through is pretty funny, once you get past all the pain, so there’s no reason not to give people a chuckle.
Q: Were you aiming for chuckles?
A: Get enough chuckles and you eventually have them ROFL. But chuckles are fine. Hell, just having people realize that we’ve all experienced some of this weirdness called life would be cool. Second, it’s not just HR and PR that suck; pretty much any large organization is horrible if people don’t keep watch on them like a lioness guards her cubs. This book is a bit of a warning about that.
Q: A spiritual lighthouse?
A: Oh, that’s good. Hope so. Anyway, reading about mistakes that can hurt yourself and harm others may prompt people to avoid those errors in their own lives. And if just one kid being raised by a republican jebus-freak is saved by “Secret Sex,” then the book is a success.
Q: Just one?
A: Okay, two. Another reason is the fun of doing a serialized novel.
Q: Did the idea of serialization appeal to you because it’s how some books by Thomas Hardy, Charles Dickens, and Robert Louis Stevenson were published?
A: You bet. Any time my work can be put in the same category as a few dead writers, count me in! The serialized publishing process was too nifty to pass up. Just as you might tune into an ongoing TV show like a soap opera, why not the same type of thing for reading? Why not bring the love of words into weekly entertainment?
Q: There’s a much smaller audience for readers as opposed to TV watchers.
A: Sure, but you can gain something from people who read. While a reading audience is lower in number, it is higher in intellect. Have you ever had to interact with people who only watch television or who don’t respect the English language? It’s like listening to Tea Baggers, Birthers, or any other part of the republican base. Yipes.
Q: How do you interact with “Secret Sex” readers?
A: Talking, texting, posting, or e-mailing. We tried carrier pigeons but it was too messy.
Q: Droppings?
A: That, and there’s a feral cat in my backyard and he really enjoys it when a hot and fresh lunch is flown in for him. But then I have to clean up the remains and skim feathers out of the pool.
Q: You make a big thing in the book about telling people the truth, even if it hurts.
A: Yes, even if it stings or pokes fun. For example, that’s a nice shirt you’re wearing. Somewhere, an Italian restaurant is missing a tablecloth.
Q: Hey, I’m wearing a white shirt!
A: People reading this interview won’t know that. And credit to Henny Youngman for that joke. Or Don Rickles. Or both.
Q: Do you think you’re the hero of the “Secret Sex” book?
A: No way.
Q: But the main character has your name.
A: Pure coincidence.
Q: It’s your voice and your point of view being delivered by this coincidentally named John Scott G person.
A: I am not responsible for all the actions of the characters in my books, plays, or screenplays. Especially what they do between scenes or between chapters. And by the way, in the case of this “John Scott G” of whom you speak, the word “character” certainly seems fitting.
Q: Well then, who would you say is the hero of the book?
A: The reader.
Q: That seems disingenuous.
A: Okay.
Q: No other comment?
A: Nope.
Q: All right then. Can you talk a little about your writing style?
A: Don’t have one.
Q: You mean you’re not consciously aiming for a style?
A: Okay.
Q: But you have a certain way of composing sentences.
A: Wow, what a great review.
Q: A lot of what you write just flows very smoothly.
A: Thank you.
Q: But because of that flow, do you feel that it can seem facile or glib?
A: Absolutely. But for me, the operative word in what you said is “flow.” That’s a primary goal. Grab a reader from the opening sentence and take them on a word journey to the final phrase. The more you can shape your sentences to keep people rolling all the way to the finish line, the better.
Q: Did that come from writing so many ads?
A: Exactly. Ads, brochures, radio and TV commercial scripts. Anything where the result of the words determines if you’re going to keep getting paid. Best training for me was writing direct-response advertising. If people bought the product, clipped the coupon, showed up at the event, called their Congressperson, etc., that’s how you measured success.
Q: Have you always written for a living?
A: Yes, I have been a professional word nerd for all my adult life.
Q: There is pride in that statement.
A: Sure. Words are good.
Q: Even in advertising?
A: Ah, well, not as often as they should be. Not sure why the universe wanted me to write so much that was disingenuous, but I tried to look at the ad agencies and PR firms as a long-term writing academy where they were paying me to learn composition while studying psychology and propaganda. It’s good to get paid for writing. Sometimes well-compensated and sometimes pitifully under-remunerated, but paid nonetheless.
Q: You think advertising is the same as propaganda?
A: Yeah. Different goals, same techniques.
Q: How much of “Secret Sex” is invented, how much is altered, and how much is reality?
A: All of it happened. It didn’t all happen to me; some friends’ experiences were appropriated for the trials and tribulations of Jay Ess Gee, our not-so-heroic and very humble narrator. And some experiences were combined.
Q: Example?
A: The arrow being shot at me is one example. It went through my hair, back when I had hair, but even though it happened to me, it didn’t seem believable once that scene was written. So the nick-on-the-chin was substituted. But I actually got that small scar on my chin when taking a header off my bike, which is a funny story that didn’t make it into the book.
Q: You wish to include it now?
A: Sure. I was racing another kid, we both accidentally veered into a patch of freshly laid asphalt, our bikes stopped and we didn’t. The sounds were “whoosh, scrunch, whaaaiiiiiieeeeeeee!” and “THRUMP.” Followed by him crying.
A: Oh, and not you?
Q: Couldn’t. Unconscious.
Q: You came from a small town but you live in Los Angeles now?
A: Right.
Q: Do you like it?
A: It’s okay. A large city is better than a small town in many ways. Libraries. Used book shops. Record stores. Diversity. More importantly, you can be anonymous in a big town, if you like. You have no choice but to be examined by everyone in a tiny burg.
Q: I’d like to ask you about writers and see how much you share with what is common among many of them.
A: Okay.
Q: Are writers loners.
A: Usually.
Q: Weird?
A: Sure.
Q: Freaks?
A: Frequently.
Q: Alcoholics?
A: Often, although in my case we just say “He is sometimes on a first name basis with fermented and distilled spirits.”
Q: Are writers addicts?
A: Not the ones who get a lot of writing done.
Q: Do you imbibe when writing?
A: Never.
Q: Never?
A: It doesn’t work. Sentences get garbled. Paragraphs don’t make sense. Chapters don’t get completed. Believe me, I’ve tried that approach. It seems like such a great idea but it just screws everything up. Don’t know about other people but for me it’s not possible to drink and write or get high and write.
Q: Maybe . . .
A: You’re not suggesting combining drinking, drugs, and composition?
Q: Just a thought.
A: Been there, failed at that.
Q: You tried it?
A: Sure. I mean, what if it had worked, what a hoot that would be. “‘Scuse me, gotta have a joint and a shot.” Then someone would protest, “But John Scott, it’s ten o’clock in the morning!” And I’d say, “Sure, but I’ve got a new chapter to write.”
Q: I guess you’re right.
A: Getting altered in any way just means that distractions take over. Music gets played loud while the TV is on with the sound down. A Douglas Sirk movie with Miles Davis on the stereo. Or a sporting event with Mindless Self Indulgence or the Blood Brothers blasting out of the speakers. Fun sometimes, but totally unproductive.
Q: Where do you do your writing?
A: Anywhere. Usually there’s a pen in my pocket so I’m always ready. Sometimes people give me miniature recording devices, and while they work there’s dictation even when driving. Mostly I write in a spare room in my house.
Q: Any distractions?
A: Other than the refrigerator being in the same building with me, nothing major. I sometimes put jazz or classical music on, but it only registers on my brain if I stop writing.
Q: Do you have tips for writers?
A: No. What works for me might not work for them.
Q: Oh come on, what works for you?
A: Okay: when in doubt, write. Just write it down. Whatever it is. Scribble it, dictate it, compose it, whatever. Get some sort of start. You can always expand it, tweak it, edit it, toss it for a while, or rewrite it.
Q: How many rewrites do you do on a chapter?
A: Dunno. Eight?
Q: Eight?
A: Probably eight, on average.
Q: That’s a lot.
A: I don’t think so. You write something. You go over it to make sure you’ve covered everything. You go over that to try making it flow. You print it out and read it on the page, ’cause for some reason, it looks and feels different on paper than on screen. You tweak it. You read it out loud. You tweak it again. You do a couple of “final passes” at it. Maybe you read it out loud again. Hell, I’ve done a couple dozen rewrites of things.
Q: You are writing two books at once, “Secret Sex” and “Ambient Deviant Speedmetal Polka.”
A: Three. The new one is “Area Code 666.”
Q: Okay, three books. And you’re also writing articles for eNewsChannels and the Music Industry Newswire.
A: Right.
Q: And you’re still doing publicity and advertising writing?
A: That’s right.
Q: Seems like a lot.
A: Thank you.
Q: What are your goals with “Ambient Deviant Speedmetal Polka”?
A: Writing about music is generally considered to be an impossible task. The most famous saying is “Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.” My version is: Writing about music is like knitting about sculpture. So my non-achievable goal with “Ambient Deviant” is to bring alive the experience of listening to music just using words. It cannot be done, but I’m going to see how close I can come.
Q: How many chapters will be in “Secret Sex”?
A: Forty-eight. Unless there’s a second edition, but I’m not planning that.
Q: How many for “Ambient Deviant”?
A: Good question. Probably at least that many. I have notes for about a hundred, but not all will make it into the book.
Q: What about “Area Code 666”?
A: Six hundred sixty-six.
Q: You’re kidding.
A: Nope.
Q: What’s it about?
A: Life on earth.
Q: Can you be more specific?
A: I’m going to try to cover everything.
Q: Really.
A: The narrator of “Area Code 666” is Lucifer, so we’ll see everybody and everything. Now, back in history, high life, lowlifes, the works.
Q: All right. That sounds ambitious. Any words of advice for anyone hoping to write more than they do now?
A: Long hours, hard work, and a total disregard for quality.
Q: Ba-dum-bum-bum!
A: Credit to David Steinberg on that one.
Q: Well, your writing seems pretty good.
A: That’s what an author likes to hear. “Ladies and gentlemen, permit me to introduce a writer whose prodigious output is pretty good.”
Q: I didn’t mean it to be pejorative.
A: That’s okay. Quite frankly, in the age of the blog, I’ll be happy to be considered “pretty good” most of the time. I just keep trying to create something truly worthwhile, which I define as affecting someone’s view of themselves and their place in the universe.
Q: Do you apply that philosophy to all your writing, whether it’s for the books or the articles or the publicity?
A: No, there are different goals with ads and publicity. The trick with hype is to make it seem as if someone other than me is writing it. Also, you want a media announcement to have a Sgt. Joe Friday feel to it.
Q: Who?
A: Character played by Jack Webb in “Dragnet” whose catchphrase was “Just the facts, ma’am.”
Q: Does it ever get confusing writing a press release, then an article, then a book chapter, then a music review or book review, then back again?
A: Life gets confusing, but each writing project has its own parameters and rules, so no, there’s no puzzlement there. You open a file and just slide into the words like stepping into a hot shower.
Q: You love words but you don’t use big ones as often as writers who, well, who take themselves seriously.
A: Yup, he said flippantly, in a sentence with one small word.
Q: Would you say you practice the concept of KISS, or Keep It Simple, Stupid?
A: Hmm, sure, but it is more because of my steadfast allegiance to the practice of eschewing obfuscation.
Q: Do you admire writers who are also disinclined to go multi-syllabic in their choice of words?
A: I like that: “disinclined to go multi-syllabic.” Cool!
Q: Thank you. I do my best.
A: Size matters, but not word size. Good writing is what excites me. I mean, in terms of writing.
Q: Can you give some examples:
A: Sure. Christopher Hitchens. You read his stuff with a dictionary nearby, but it’s still a joy to read his work. Same thing with a book like “Lolita,” where it’s a treat to read such great prose. I just ordered “The Annotated Lolita” to explore Nabakov’s language even further. But look, it’s also a kick to read a Dick Francis novel. Or Dave Barry’s articles. Barry is a man whose essays are models of structure and picture-perfect pitch while using words that we all understand even as he makes milk come out your nose from his one-liners.
Q: Are there any poets you admire?
A: Thanks for a great opportunity for me to look erudite and esoteric! Try this: “As one who holds the work of Sylvia Plath in high regard, let us now explicate her ‘Ariel’ with numerous side references to William Blake’s ‘Songs of Innocence and Experience,’ shall we?”
Q: You enjoy Plath and Blake?
A: Uh, sure.
Q: Oh, so not really.
A: No, they’re fine. But it’s just –
Q: Come on.
A: Okay, on my bedside table is a copy of “100 Poems” by E.E. Cummings. Very enjoyable. Now, many people have told me he’s too “cute” in his writing, but that may be because he has fun with jokes and puns. His poem “may i feel, said he?” is a delightful little one-act play in 137 words. Brilliant. But it certainly could be called cute. And “nobody loses all the time,” which is poignant and bittersweet, concludes with a grade-school joke. But there is so much knowledge and humanity and sadness wrapped up in Cummings’ writing that my heart halts when reading some of his work. It —
Q: Go on.
A: Reading “it may not always be so” can make me weep at the expression of love and loss. Some of his writing may be cute but for me it is also great.
Q: What else is on your bedside table?
A: Merriam Webster dictionary, the “All Music Guide to Jazz,” “The 100 Greatest Looney Tunes Cartoons,” edited by Jerry Beck, Mark Twain’s autobiography which Will Be Read One Of These Days I Swear It, and whatever is my current reading material.
Q: Which is?
A: “Reading Jazz,” edited by Robert Gottlieb.
Q: What have you read recently?
A: “Lolita;” “Arguably” by Hitchens; “The Rest is Noise” by Alex Ross; “Visions of Jazz” by Gary Giddins . . . You can get an idea of what I’ve been reading from my book reviews on eNewsChannels and the Music Industry Newswire, including “Drift” by Rachel Maddow, “Among the Truthers” by Jonathan Hay, “Acid Christ,” the Ken Kesey bio by Mark Christensen, “The Last Testament” by David Javerbaum, “Raise Up Off Me” by Hampton Hawes and Don Asher, and “The Ellington Century” by David Schiff.
Q: There’s only one novel in that list.
A: True. Although parts of the Kesey biography seemed like a novel.
Q: You prefer non-fiction?
A: Yes. Novels were my favorite in high school and college, but non-fiction gradually took over. By the way, what the hell kind of a description is “non-fiction,” anyway? What if we started reversing it? Here are the reality books and over there are the made-up books.
Q: Not going to happen.
A: You’re right.
Q: “Secret Sex” is a sort of summing up of your life so far. Other than what is overt or implied in the book, what are some things you regret in life?
A: Well, besides always picking the wrong woman and often trusting people before seeing them handle a bad patch of life, my biggest regret is that I never became well-known enough to be drawn by Al Hirschfeld. I can cope with being unknown but that man took caricature and turned it into art and what a glorious feeling it must have been to become even a tiny part of that.
Q: Hirschfeld’s work is excellent. Do you try to find every “Nina” in his drawings?
A: Yes!
Q: Are you on social networks?
A: Yeah.
Q: Which ones?
A: You realize this is going to date this interview, right?
Q: Sure, but still . . .
A: Okay: Google+, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn.
Q: You don’t seem happy about it.
A: The communication aspects of them are terrific. The time-drain aspects of them are horrifying. The inventors of social media networks will roast in hell. Not as long as republicans, but still . . . .You know, in some regards, the Luddite movement has some attraction, don’t you think? I am a neo-Luddite, I’m afraid. And that is why books have taken on more importance to me. Writing them and reading them seem like part of a good war to wage. ADD and AD/HD are rampant enough without encouraging their further development.
Q: Can we get to a touchy subject?
A: Sorry, I’m hetero. But thanks, you’re quite attractive, in spite of the shirt.
Q: Well, I meant about the book, but that does bring up another topic.
A: Gay vs. straight. Well, that’s something else, besides racism and republicanism, which I honestly thought would not be a problem once I was an adult. But now it appears those horrors will always be with us. Some things have changed on the surface. When I was growing up, that little joke about “you’re quite attractive” would have been unthinkable between two guys. But it would have been considered okay if a guy directed it towards a woman. Today, the guy using a line like that to a woman could be accused of “sexual harassment” but it’s just a funny bit if made to another guy. As my son often said, “people are weird.”
Q: We change and evolve, but not necessarily for the better.
A: Right.
Q: But back to the potentially contentious subject . . .
A: Oh, right.
Q: There are two sequences in your book that people say they find, well, let’s use the word “familiar.”
A: Right. The sex while destruction derby footage is in the theater and the putting insects into bullies’ lunches.
Q: Yes. You care to comment on that?
A: Sure. I lived both of those. I hesitated about putting them in because someone else had invented scenes like them, but then I thought “screw it, these are real.” Both of those things happened, both happened to me, both are funny, and so both are in the book. Anybody wants to complain about it, fine; I just hope the complaint generates some discussion.
Q: For the publicity?
A: Right.
Q: Some people have said that certain scenes in the book are misogynistic.
A: The character of Uncle Man is what you might call a realist misogynist. I mean, the guy speaks from experience. The John Scott G character was fairly nice to women. Mainly, things happened to him by women and he reacted. Not very violently, at least not in the book.
Q: But in life?
A: Well, in life, I wrote a song that generated a bit of controversy. [Warning: Language Alert! Skip this answer if you are easily offended] The song is called “Cunt is in the Dictionary With a Picture of You.”
Q: Yes, that word gets a lot of people upset. Mainly women.
A: Yup. Although they all know exactly what I mean. I’m told the song is fairly popular among men who are being put through a divorce. The thing is, the song is about behavior. Yes, my ex-wife is one of the subjects of the song, but so are Jeffrey Skilling and Kenneth Lay of Enron, and Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and, well, the entire W administration, and the turd half of the Supreme Court, and so on.
Q: The turd half?
A: Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and often Roberts and Kennedy. So I don’t think misogyny is the issue with that song or with “Secret Sex.”
Q: I’m just repeating what some have said.
A: Sure, I know. But look, I don’t care much for humanity, and despite what some people say, women are human. You know, most of the time. Well, so okay, maybe a little misogynistic. But it seems like if a charge is going to be leveled at “Secret Sex,” misanthropic might fit better. My dad once told me, “People are no damn good.” I think the book demonstrates that in between the laughter.
Q: Is there any settling of scores in the book?
A: No, I think that would only be the case if people were named. Other than public figures, I mean. Now, it’s true that the clowns, cranks, and crooks will recognize themselves if they read the book. But unless they want to call attention to those passages, it’s just a case where I’ll know, they’ll know, and my true friends will know, but the public will not.
Q: You touch on a number of issues in the book. Faith, religion, sex — obviously — education, creativity, and more. Is it a fair charge to say that “Secret Sex” veers all over the map?
A: Sure. Just like life.
Q: And speaking of life, do you have thoughts on its conclusion?
A: Death.
Q: Yes.
A: I’m not in favor of it. However, since I choose to believe that there is something else awaiting us, I have to admit to looking forward to getting answers to a lot of questions that have occurred to me over the years. And I am definitely planning on coming back to haunt a whole bunch of people, so I’ll be very busy after I die.
Q: You wrote that you believe in God but reject religion.
A: I did, and I do.
Q: You make fun of some faiths in the book.
A: Cults are the object of my derision. Using the word “faith” is giving them too much respect.
Q: You are strongly anti-religion.
A: Yes.
Q: But they do a lot of good.
A: Some of them, some of the time. But whatever good they do can be done without any of the religiosity, the rituals, the folderol, the costumes, the rites, the stained glass windows, the proselytizing, the condescension, the meddling in politics, and so on.
Q: The pedophilia.
A: Yes. Exactly. Thank you.
Q: You specifically call out Mormonism, Catholicism, and Christianity in “Secret Sex.”
A: Sure. Guess a few were left out. The jerkoffs who ran the indie record label that signed The G-Man claimed to be Buddhist. It that’s true, then that cult is as phony as the rest. And for the record, I am not amused by Islam. Or perhaps I should say the radically violent cliques who use Islam as an excuse for their acts of terror. The few Muslims I’ve met have been as appalled as I was at those sub-human creatures who are, how shall we put it, who are making the world unsafe for Muslims.
Q: Have you had any fallout from the chapter that conflated your molestation with conservatives?
A: Some, but it’s not a big deal. The average republican is too stupid to read any book that has not already been read to them as they were growing up; and the weasel who runs FauxNews and the potentates who run the GOP don’t worry about me because they’ve got other things to do. They’re too busy overseeing the financial rape of most citizens, even those who watch FauxNews and vote for the GOP, oddly enough.
Q: Do you see the GOP as bullies?
A: Absolutely. Which goes along with the conservative republican mind-set. They take their input from an authority figure who professes his belief in jebus and that’s good enough for them. That makes them feel safe and secure. So they must attack any scientific fact that challenges their feelings. Progressives react in an opposite manner and almost welcome the challenge or even the doubt that new information provides. I joke that republicans suffer from a “synapse lapse” but it’s actually a deeper psychological problem that prevents them from processing factual information.
Q: And you see their bullying and relate it back to your being bullied or abused?
A: Yeah, I do.
Q: Have you ever bullied anyone?
A: Yes. In junior high school. What now would be called middle school.
Q: Care to tell me about it?
A: Not a good moment of my life, but sure. Everyone in the school was given a card with a locker number and combination printed on it. We went to the locker, memorized the combination, and that was that. You’d keep the card in a wallet or at home or whatever. But one guy held the card up against the wall while he opened his locker. He did it several times over that first week. It was hard not to learn his combination.
Q: And you messed up his belongings?
A: Yup. As payback, or at least that’s how I saw it. He used to shove smaller kids out of his way when he walked through the halls. Pissed me off.
Q: Did you do anything odious?
A: My work was a bit more subtle. At that school, everyone put covers on their textbooks. It was easy to go to the used bookstore and get a book that was the same size as, say, the history text. I would swap out the book so he’d have a romance novel or something instead of the required book. Seemed reasonable to me at the time. But I had to stop when things got out of hand.
Q: How so?
A: The guy eventually shoved somebody’s little brother or sister and the retribution escalated. My level of “Gaslighting” the guy wasn’t deemed strong enough. When they started using bodily excretions, that’s when my participation ended. But I was certainly a culprit at the start. The guy never knew what to expect every time he opened the locker. Drove him nuts. He’s probably a bank employee now, happily foreclosing on innocent people. Sorry about that.
Q: Although it is not in the book, you are on record as saying you celebrate the deaths of certain individuals.
A: Yes.
Q: Do you find a moral contradiction there?
A: Probably, but we’ll just have to put up with it. When a collection of dung in human form dies, it is acceptable for decent people to at least breathe a sigh of relief. When Ronald Reagan died, it was acceptable for lovers of decency to shout Whoo-hoo! and then move on with their lives. Our long national nightmare experience with an Alzheimer’s president was over. When Andrew Breitbart died, another momentary shout of joy, and then get on with the business at hand. Nixon, yaaaay. Maybe the celebration will be a bit bigger when Roger Ailes dies. Or Alito, or Scalia, or Paul Ryan or Cheney or any member of the Bush clan or any of the cabal of conservative creepazoids who are infecting the body politic. There is no shame in being glad when traitors and greedwhores are finally plucked from this earth. Not sure why the bowels of hell haven’t opened for them sooner, quite frankly.
Q: Another charge that has been leveled at you is that you’re a bit of a dabbler. You write in several genres and styles, you compose music and song lyrics, you’ve created interactive art events, you discuss politics, healthcare, music, books, religiosity, the paranormal . . .
A: Yup. Guilty. Dabbler, that’s me. But each of those topics holds some interest for me, so why the hell not write about them? As for my own main area of activity, well, you need to reinvent yourself every ten years or so.
Q: You think so?
A: Yeah. The thing is, though, writing has been at the heart of almost everything. Even the painting, photography, and conceptual art that I did began with my writing down goals for each event. And each one was concluded with my written review. Or post-mortem, if you will.
Q: Speaking of post-mortem, can we conclude this interview with the Bernard Pivot list of ten questions?
A: Can we pretend we’re on “Inside the Actors Studio” while we’re doing them?
Q: If you wish. Ready?
A: Set.
Q: What is your favorite word?
A: Now.
Q: What is your least favorite word?
A: Forbidden.
Q: What turns you on creatively, spiritually or emotionally?
A: When a writer takes a familiar situation and lets you see it or experience it in a new way.
Q: What turns you off?
A: People who do not allow their mind to work to its full potential.
Q: What is your favorite curse word?
A: Can’t limit it. And besides, my preference is for combo cursing. As in “God damn fuck it!” or even a statement of fact like, “The republicorp members of Congress are shitbrain motherfucking piss-face assholes.” One word just won’t do.
Q: What sound or noise do you love?
A: The rapid breathing of a woman about to enter into ecstasy.
Q: What sound or noise do you hate?
A: Raffi, Teletubbies, Barney, that sort of thing.
Q: What profession other than your own would you like to attempt?
A: Professional killer might be interesting. For every paid assignment I could then do a pro bono hit on one of the right wing nut jobs. Make the world a better place. Satisfying. It would be doing God’s work, which is much needed since he/she/it is obviously slacking off in this area.
Q: What profession would you not like to do?
A: Burglar, pickpocket, congressman — anyone in the trade.
Q: If heaven exists, what would you like to hear God say when you arrive at the Pearly Gates?
A: “Good job. Want to go again?” Or, if we don’t get do-overs, it would be great to hear that “Gene Tierney, Hedy Lamarr, Caroline Munro, and Martha Vickers are waiting for you in the master bedroom.”
Q: Is that your version of the 72 virgins?
A: Right! Well, without the hymens. I mean, look, those four women were all extraordinarily beautiful actresses often working in Hollywood so I am positive that they have the necessary experience.
Q: Do you have secret sex with them?
A: Hey, having it right now.
• To read the next chapter or pick up where you left off, visit the main index at: https://enewschannels.com/tag/secret-sex/ — or visit the Table of Contents for “Secret Sex” at: http://johnscottg.com/secret_CHAPTERS.htm
“Secret Sex, A Book Alive Online,” written and lived by John Scott G, is Copr. © 2011-2012 by JSG, all rights reserved under U.S. and international copyright conventions. Commercial use in any form is forbidden without express written permission of the author. Originally published on eNewsChannels.com with permission. Credits: Book cover design: Phil Hatten.
