SRD on obscurity

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes · 10 Jun 2006, 01:02 · from 2006-June.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: danldo at gmail.com (Dan'l Danehy-Oakes)
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 18:02:42 -0700
Subject: (urth) SRD on obscurity
In-Reply-To: <2124d6b10606091604v41715c11ja5d72603001b7e4e at mail.gmail.com>
References: <1f7617370606091436r75c733f3x7de5dcd18332ae51 at mail.gmail.com>
	<200606091843.57324.ddjones at riddlemaster.org>
	<2124d6b10606091550o23494b48v2bd179ee8603ffcb at mail.gmail.com>
	<1f7617370606091553h73401e69q971ec7477d1dd071 at mail.gmail.com>
	<2124d6b10606091604v41715c11ja5d72603001b7e4e at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1f7617370606091802p5c4623d5vf9785f8ac489f8ac at mail.gmail.com>

On 6/9/06, pthwndxrclzp <aquastor at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ah, so let me get this straight. Anyone who disagrees
>  with your opinions on literary quality is a child?

No; but I do think that anyone who confuses "writer I
don't like" with "egregiously untalented," or confuses
their personal opinions with facts ("Donaldson's early
prose is mind-numbingly unreadable" as opposed to
"I find Donaldson's early prose mind-numbingly unreadable")
has a bit of semantic maturing to do.

Nonetheless, I should not have written my previous
comment in such a blatantly insulting manner, and I
apologize for that.

> Your mileage may well vary, Grandpa.

My mileage usually varies; I drive many different roads.
And, while I could in theory be a grandfather (my
elder child will be 24 this year), I'm not.

> As for able fantasy stylists, I prefer the work of folks like
> Gene Wolfe, C.S. Friedman, Mervyn Peake, John Myers
> Myers, Jennifer Stevenson, John C. Wright, Lois McMaster
> Bujold, even George R.R. Martin.

I was with you part of the way -- of those in this list I've
read, I find them better stylists than the early Donaldson
(though even there, if you check out his non-Covenant
short stories, collected in _Daughter of Regals_, you
may be in for a bit of a shock). B ut when you get to
Lois McMaster Bujold ... I have never successfully read
a single book of hers, and I've tried several. This is my
problem; I know she's a well-respected writer, and I
know better than to confuse "bad writer" with "writer I
don't like."

But then, so is Donaldson a well-respected writer,
except among people who apparently can't make
that not-terribly-complex distinction.

> But then, you probably like *Tolkien*.... <shudder>

Indeed I do; and Lewis and Williams -- but for very
different reasons (and only one of them as a stylist).

-- 
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant

-----
http://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer
"One o'th'flay-rods gone out o'skew on th'treadle."

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net