The Twaddle

Controverama

Yay! A letter! (This letter was sent to a previous incarnation of El Twad, when it was known as “This Wasn't A Tree”.)

Hi!

Well ok, Matthew, you originally said to me that the site would be an alternative to the college newspaper, not a complete parody of it! I expected something which included some level of constructive criticism, not total slander and I'm pretty sure that poetry doesn't have to conform to English literature standards to be accepted as an expression of whatever the author was feeling at the time. The artwork on the site could be reviewed, and sorry but I.W.O.T definately kicks your arse on that front!

Yeah ok, so I suppose you're entitled to your opinion, and it's just a guess but I don't think the smokers even care if their smoke is blown in your face, in fact I'm thinking of taking up smoking just so I can blow it in your face. There are smokers wherever you go so I guess you're going to have to deal with it! Remember, it's an addiction and unless you've ever smoked yourself, you can't judge how hard it is to stop. As for a passive abortion, don't be ridiculous! Am I supposed to be laughing at these comments, because I'm not and God knows I have to have a pretty big sense of humour to manage to laugh off sitting next to you in R.S.!

However, you do score points for humour on the site itself. I was laughing all the time I was reading it! Wow, how clever are you!? (Rhetorical question) you managed to totally slag off a bunch of your year group! As if you weren't disliked enough for your clearly snobbish attitude towards erm.... everyone apart from your friends, (as few in number as they are). If you think you're such an expert on poetry, prove it! Write some and we can all get a realistic grasp on this. The question of the fortnight is clearly, “is the T.W.A.T team a serious group of literature students which they claim to be or does the title of the ‘newspaper’ clearly speak for it's editorial team?!” I choose the latter.

If you “h8 poetry” then why the hell are you so concerned if someone wants to use it as a form of self-expression, and “kill it”? Oh, and by the way, there may be no assonance but since when is that the be all and end all of poetry?!

Oh, by the way, the two authors of the poems in the official college newspaper, both got A's at AS level, so I'm pretty sure they're not offended because are they going to listen to an examiner and a teacher, or a few arrogant boys who believe they can dictate what literature should be? I'm pretty sure no one's all that concerned about this prescriptive view, and the belief that “poetry is an age-old art that should be respected” or whatever!

Well, sorry boys but writing a newspaper is an age-old art that should be respected and offer a two-sided argument and facts, not the opinion of a few teenagers!

No one in the newspaper ever claimed it would be more than a laugh and something that they wanted to produce in their spare time, whereas you seem to believe it was intended to be taken seriously!

Well, congrats on the paper, it's a pile of shit.

Lots of love, Heather! Xxx

The Twaddle Says...

you originally said to me that the site would be an alternative to the college newspaper, not a complete parody of it!

Only the (old, defunct) title is a parody of I.W.O.T. (“I Was Once a Tree”, the official college newspaper); the rest is brand spanking new and original.

I expected something which included some level of constructive criticism, not total slander

We haven't attempted to criticise I.W.O.T., never mind unconstructively, and we certainly haven't libelled anyone (nor will we). We might have taken the proverbial, rather more than somewhat, for which we apologise. It was, however, all intended in good jest.

I'm pretty sure that poetry doesn't have to conform to English literature standards to be accepted as an expression of whatever the author was feeling at the time

True. However, proper use of grammar would be far more eloquent; incorrect grammar is just sloppy, certainly in the case of English students (who one would expect to know the rules), writing for an official college publication.

The artwork on the site could be reviewed, and sorry but I.W.O.T definately kicks your arse on that front!

Really? I quite like it, but then I'd be biased. Unlike I.W.O.T.'s artwork, our logo is supposed to be an instantly recognisable symbol, rather than artwork per se. The site's meant to be about substance, not style (although style's fun too).

it's just a guess but I don't think the smokers even care if their smoke is blown in your face

Well they should, else they're just being inconsiderate.

in fact I'm thinking of taking up smoking just so I can blow it in your face.

That's nice of you.

There are smokers wherever you go so I guess you're going to have to deal with it!

There are non-smokers wherever smokers go; they're going to have to deal with not smoking at other people.

it's an addiction and unless you've ever smoked yourself, you can't judge how hard it is to stop.

That smoking is an addiction is no excuse – smokers entered into it voluntarily (and peer pressure isn't a valid excuse for that either). I'm sure it's hellishly difficult to stop, and I'm not saying all smokers should on my account – just having the common decency to point it away from other people would suffice (toward other smokers who would enjoy it, perhaps).

As for a passive abortion, don't be ridiculous!

That's rather the point – one chooses to have an abortion whereas tobacco smoke is inflicted upon non-smokers involuntarily.

Am I supposed to be laughing at these comments, because I'm not

You can laugh if you like, but the article exists to make a serious point (with or without humour).

Wow, how clever are you!? (Rhetorical question)

Very. (Rhetorical answer)

you managed to totally slag off a bunch of your year group! As if you weren't disliked enough for your clearly snobbish attitude towards erm.... everyone apart from your friends, (as few in number as they are).

We didn't set out to slag anyone off – just to say we don't like their work, and to see if we can do better. We also don't like to descend to personal insults but, if you insist, “at least we're not you”.

If you think you're such an expert on poetry, prove it!

No-one's claiming to be an expert on poetry, which is why there's none on the site; Matthew is an expert on his personal opinion, which the article serves to express.

The question of the fortnight is clearly, “is the T.W.A.T team a serious group of literature students which they claim to be or does the title of the ‘newspaper’ clearly speak for it's editorial team?!” I choose the latter.

We don't claim to be either serious or literature students, although we are certainly a group, and two of the site's three contributors thus far are indeed English Literature students. We also don't claim to be a newspaper, as the site contains no news so far, only opinion.

If you “h8 poetry” then why the hell are you so concerned if someone wants to use it as a form of self-expression, and “kill it”?

Matthew doesn't “h8 poetry”, only teenage poetry, which he sees as consistently awful, hence the article.

Oh, by the way, the two authors of the poems in the official college newspaper, both got A's at AS level, so I'm pretty sure they're not offended

Good – we don't intend to cause offence to our readers.

are they going to listen to an examiner and a teacher, or a few arrogant boys who believe they can dictate what literature should be?

Actually, only one “arrogant boy” is responsible for the article; I'm sure he doesn't believe he can dictate what literature should be; he can, however, dictate what he believes good literature is.

Well, sorry boys but writing a newspaper is an age-old art that should be respected and offer a two-sided argument and facts, not the opinion of a few teenagers!

Indeed; newspapers should take heed and abolish the political bias that permeates their medium. Magazines, on the other hand, can offer teenagers' opinions in good conscience.

No one in the newspaper ever claimed it would be more than a laugh and something that they wanted to produce in their spare time, whereas you seem to believe it was intended to be taken seriously!

If the first edition of I.W.O.T. was a joke, I didn't get it. We just reckon we can do better, that's all.

Well, congrats on the paper, it's a pile of shit.

Ah, come on! It's not that bad! It isn't quite as good as our magazine, though.

So it seems some people think we have something against I.W.O.T. and its creators – we haven't. We just weren't big fans of the first issue, and fancied having a go at making a magazine ourselves – friendly rivalry. We sincerely hope the hatchet is now firmly buried.

Note: at the time of writing, Matthew Gardner was unavailable for comment. He is said to be currently recovering from mild depression after having received this letter. We wish him well.

Grr

A response to the above letter, from Anonymous hater of smokers:

This is in response to the letter from that Heather person. Poetry should conform to standard English Literature form, otherwise it is just simple bland words, and yes, I can appreciate the author probably did put some feeling into it, but how are we supposed to understand it by bland cliché expression? If it meant something to that person, fair enough, but why do they publish it? It's not as we can appreciate random thoughts of the author that are vague.

The point I think that was being made by my right honourable friend is that smoking shouldn't be a thing that people should have to put up with; if ignorant people do smoke, that's their (cancerous) issue, but that doesn't mean they have the right to poison anyone else. Laws will be coming in and I guarantee you that people will start being sued for it. I mean for example, people smoke and stub their “fags” out on the non smoking signs – I mean pathetic or what? And when you do walk past they do not hesitate in blowing it in your face – it's infuriating. If they want to die, let them get on with it, but what gives them the right to harm others? Would they like it if I started putting Arsenic in their tea? I don't think so.

Haha, and as for this “Heather”? Unbelievably hypocritical, you say that Matthew's paper just slams everyone; aren't you doing the same in your snotty little tone? You don't sound fantastically clever yourself...