{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/1446",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 1446,
    "subject": "James Branch Cabell [Digest urth.v024.n019]",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "1999-03-23T09:42:47+00:00",
    "last": "1999-03-23T09:42:47+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0024-0085@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "John Bishop",
        "address": "jbishop at blkbrd.zko.dec.com"
      },
      "date": "1999-03-23T09:42:47+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) Re: James Branch Cabell [Digest urth.v024.n019]",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Oddly enough, I recently re-read _Jurgen_.\n\nI agree with Roy Lackey, and spell out one implication:\nfiction that makes references to other literature \n(or to people or events) can be clear to some readers \n(and thus popular) when it is first published, but often \nbecomes completely obscure to later readers -- who then\nrespond by not reading it.\n\nThe recent Shakespear and Austen revivals show the \ndifficulties involved -- the world we live in is so\ndifferent and the backgrounds of the readers so changed\nthat you need footnotes or a lengthy introduction to \ncatch the fine points. (They also show that a good story\nor good ideas can survive such handicaps.)\n\nAnother factor to consider is the change in the border\nof a taboo.  For example, _Jurgen_ is full of what at the\ntime were slightly rude but clever references to sex.\nA woman will remark \"I see you brought your sword\",\nand later will complement him on his swordmanship, and\nso on.  Today these remarks seem coy and mannered rather\nthan funny, as the line between the publishable and the\nforbidden has moved a long way.\n\n\t-John Bishop"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}