From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Science Fiction In General Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:31:24 -0600
----- Original Message ----- From: "Travis Edmunds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 6:24 PM Subject: Re: Science Fiction In General
> >From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: Science Fiction In General > >Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 18:24:15 -0600 > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Travis Edmunds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 10:42 AM > >Subject: Re: Science Fiction In General > > > > >I've read every King book as they were published over the last 30 > >something years. And I chuckle a bit when I read statements like this. > >Remember Dickens was subject to exactly the same kinds of criticism > >you make and so were many books that are now considered "classics". > > > A nice, if not relevant comparison. Don't tell me however that King is in > the same league as Dickens.
Sure, why not? A populist writer who reflects his times quite well, but was often lambasted during his life? I think you could make lots of comparisons. A lot of contrasts too, but that is only natural.
I speak of his writing ability.
> > > >King, like most of us is a child of the television era, and like many > >of us, grew up watching horror movies. This is strongly reflected in > >his writing and the smell of matinee popcorn wafts from every page. > > Pure gold in words. I really like that. >
Thanks, I learned how to write while reading Stephen Kings books. <G>
<lol> I bet. Speaking of writing, do you? (Fiction that is)
>I do however judge King > himself, and render a verdict of which you already know. And it's more than > just pure taste or raw opinion. King is without a doubt a mediocre > writer.(See actual definition of "mediocre")
Well, you are not in any way judging King "himself", you are judging his abilities and qualities as a writer, and that is not in any way the same thing.
You "have me" so to speak, on that score. I never covered my tracks on that one and deserve the correction. But of course, judging his abilities and qualities as a writer is what I meant.
[Here, I take a swipe at Travis, but it is meant only as a criticism of the theme he presents and not as an attack of Travis personally or his abilities and qualities as a writer<G>]
Lets agree shall we, that from now on statements like that are not needed between us (unless otherwise stated!! <lol>), as I find you quite agreeable.
Travis, what I find objectionable in the above paragraph is that you set yourself up as an objective authority or as a party who has access to objective reality. You aren't and you don't.
True. Yet the fact remains that he is indeed "mediocre" in regard to his writing ability. Let me draw out a little analogy. You are taught in school that 2 + 2 = 4, and you tell all your friends about it. You are in fact talking about it when along come Travis. Now Travis looks at you and says: "That's not right. You're setting yourself up as an objective authority or as a party who has access to objective reality. You aren't and you don't."
Oops. There's the mistake Robert. You see 2 + 2 does in fact equal 4, and to say otherwise is an easy avenue in which to base an argument. But an avenue that's flawed because it denies the truth. Of course I'm not the objective king (pun intended), as it's impossible to be 100% objective, as we humans are subject to exist within the confines of our own little minds, thus rendering us subjective. It's all about perspective really; and when you think about it, perspective is all we have. However, once again we, as humans have to collectively agree upon things. Thus creating truth as we know it. Take language for example. It's an agreed upon set of symbols. It may not be an objective way to convey ideas, but it's the best we have, and we agree (whether consciously or not) to use it and stand by it as a means of communication. The same goes for law, math, what's funny, what's not.......blah blah blah.....up to and including literature. That's where I base MY argument; in truth, which yes, IS subjective due to individual perspective, but at least it's a unanimously agreed upon principal.
-Travis "hope we can keep this up" Edmunds...<lol>
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
