{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/1927",
    "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": 1927,
    "subject": "Clute",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "1999-11-05T23:19:22+00:00",
    "last": "1999-11-05T23:19:22+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0028-0400@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Nicholas Gevers",
        "address": "vermoulian at yahoo.com"
      },
      "date": "1999-11-05T23:19:22+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) Clute",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I think that criticisms of John Clute's style ignore\nthe fact that he is (unlike most critics) an original\nprose stylist. His innovative, if sometimes contorted,\nwriting has vastly enriched SF criticism, not only\nbecause of his cogent insights, but because he has\nunlocked a critical vocabulary equal to the complete\nexpression of those insights. He has his clumsy and\ninattentive moments, but I'd rather have him review\nOBW than leave the task to pedestrian hacks like the\nauthors of certain other published reviews cited on\namazon.\n\n\n====="
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}