miketo wrote: devNull:
Wow. I never expected that broadside. Okay, let's see what I can do without
fanning the flames further.
Well, I didn't flame you at all and I don't understand why you are so
aggressive in your response. In any case, after my one response here I'm not
going to discuss this any further with you because I see that you're one of
those people that takes everything personally. For the record, all I did was
express my concern for readers who might be put off from a classic of sci-fi
literature by your ridiculousy simplistic summary of it.
devNull wrote: What a truly astounding statement. You would
recommend the by-the-numbers drivel that is "Starship Troopers" over "Stranger
in a Strange Land", which inspired a whole generation of writers?
The first rule of writing is, "
Know your audience."
I'm not applying that rule
to Heinlein's work; I'm applying it to the age groups that read this board and
those who would read my post. From SiaSL onward, there is material in the books
that is most definitely for a mature audience only. I wouldn't recommend those
books to your average teenager. Some teenagers are mature enough to handle it,
and they will discover it soon enough if they do any reading in the sf field.
Others will snigger over the naughty parts without understanding the multiple
layers of allegory and satire that run through the novel.
Wow. I mean, wow. I don't think you even realise how arrogant that paragraph is.
So you've got everyone here figured out, eh? According to you, the people reading
these forums aren't as mature as you and can't appreciate the kind of grown-up
literature that you, in your maturity, can appreciate. "
Know your audience"
- wow.
miketo wroteNot everyone who is interested in puzzles is an sf
fan, and not everyone who is an sf fan has the maturity to read and understand
a decidedly mature-themed novel. I understand my audience here on the boards
and write appropriately.
Oh my, aren't you a treat. You hear that, "
audience on the boards"
? miketo understands
you and is deliberately dumbing down his posts for your benefit. Let's all thank
him for being so gracious.
I can grok that you didn't grok "Stranger" (which I assume you didn't,
if your summary of it is the mindnumbingly inaccurate
"old-man-discovers-naughty-things")
Actually, I do grok it. Not only do I grok it, I've written essays on it, as
have generations of college students since it was published.
So have I. I've even had two published. And that's relevant, be-cause...?
miketo wroteFor the record, SiaSL is a landmark event in sf. It
was the first novel to break ground on topics that had been considered taboo in
the field, and arguably was the inciting incident for the New Wave sf movement.
Its importance cannot be underestimated.
Well, not by a mere mortal. But
you, in your maturity, seem quite capable
of underestimating it and even putting it down to a level these simpletons reading
the CaravelGames forums can understand.
miketo wroteIf my one-dimensional yet 100% accurate observation
of "old man discoveres naughty things" gored your ox, that says more about your
preconceptions than it does about my observation.
Ah, the ol' "
No,
you're a stinky poo"
argument. I'd happily go another
round, but I'm not in kindergarten anymore.
miketo wrote[I meant to refer to Heinlein, but in the context it
could be interpreted as meaning Jubal Harshaw; my fault for not making that
clear.] Is it the only theme running through the novel? Hardly. In fact, most
people who have read Heinlein and specifically those works would understand
that it is a flip comment and not a true embodiment of the entirety.
So let me get this straight. First you say that your one-dimensional
observation of the book is 100% accurate, but then you go on to say "
Is it the
only theme running through the novel? Hardly."
Make up your mind.
miketo wroteYet if you polled sf authors today, I'll bet you a
dollar that, while SiaSL is considered important, it also marked the beginning
of the end for the rest of Heinlein's works. Nothing since then was considered
important, and the balance didn't even hold up to his YA works produced during
the peak of his career. You can only read so much wish-fulfillment fantasy
repeated through numerous volumes before realizing the Grand Master has lost
the greatness he once held.
Yes, I agree with this. The reason that "
Stranger"
was his last great book is precisely
because it was so great. He could never again top it. Thank you for making my point
for me so wonderfully. I wish I'd thought of that.
but when making book recommendations I think one has a certain
responsibility of making sure to not let personal opinions get in the way of
people discovering important books, which we happen to hate. So yes, feel free
to say that you hated "Stranger", but also, be obliged to mention to those who
don't know that it is an important book and that most people who read it
don't hate it.
miketo wroteFirst of all, I never said I "hated" SiaSL. You are
inserting a straw man argument into the discussion, which renders the rest of
your indignation irrelevant. Had you stopped to inquire about the reasons for
my statement, rather than jumping to conclusions and firing your broadside, we
could have had an interesting discussion about the pros and cons of Heinlein's
body of work from SiaSL onward.
No, you didn't say you hated it. This is irrelevant. You made it seem a
different book than it is because you didn't understand it. I thought that this
might potentially deprive others of the joy that is "
Stranger"
so I reacted.
Not as aggressively as you seem to think, but that's your problem. And no, I
don't think I could have
ever had an interesting discussion about
anything with you. Your aggression and venom are not the stuff great
discussions are made of.
miketo wrote(By the way, I'd be interested in hearing how you
justify parental and sibling incest in post-SiaSL works using Heinlein's tropes
and themes. No matter what your opinions are on Heinlein, even that is tough to
justify positively in any form, be it allegory, satire, or libertarian
philosophy. I'm quite liberal morally, but even that is going too far for my
free-and-easy, live-and-let-live sensibility.)
And, just as relevantly, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the history of Mr
Potato Head. I mean, what the hell, dude!? We're not talking about "
post-SiaSL
works"
. You oversimplified a great book and I pointed that out just in case
anybody cares what you have to say. That's it.
miketo wroteSecond of all, essays, critique, and the like are
*all* about personal opinion.
I never said anything to the contrary. Try to understand what you're responding to.
I said one should try not to let personal opinion get in the way of people getting
to know works of literature which are arguably worth getting to know.
miketo wroteWhat differentiates a screed from thoughtful
discussion is the analysis and building of a case from start to finish. The
critique always relies on personal opinion, because without a strongly-held
opinion, any discussion comes across like a bowlful of cold oatmeal.
So "
old man discovers naughty things"
is your idea of "
thoughtful discussion"
?
Or is it your idea of what constitutes "
analysis and building of a case from
start to finish"
?
miketo wroteMy one-liner wasn't a book report but a statement of
opinion. I don't like the writings of Philip K. Dick -- opinion. Must I say
that others like him? No. *You* can jump in and say why you do like Philip K.
Dick, or SiaSL, and then we can go from there. But to argue that a statement of
my opinion must of necessity define and propound your opinion is a crock.
I'm glad you enjoy hearing yourself talk so much, but do try to stay on-topic.
Your one-liner was
not a statement of opinion. It was a factually
limited and simplistic summary of the book. Had you just stated an opinion, I
wouldn't have responded at all. What you did, was give an incorrect impression
of what one of the classics of sci-fi literature is about, and I wanted to make
sure that people who haven't read it won't be put off by your statement. Even the
most devasting reviews I've ever read at least have a factually correct summary of
the work being reviewed. That's why I responded to your post. Not because of your
opinions.
miketo wroteLastly, dissent from the majority opinion has long
been valued, if the case is presented cogently and persuasively. What the mass
of people believe has always been a prompt for re-examination and discussion
among commentators and critics everywhere. One of the authors in my list,
Harlan Ellison, has made a career of close examination and persuasion and of
going against the opinion of the many. I will never hold a candle to his
essays. But, like him, I have no responsibility to validate or justify a
contrary opinion merely because it is held by many (a logical fallacy also
known as argument by number). As Anatole France said, "Just because a million
people say a stupid thing, it is still a stupid thing."
More irrelevant blah blah blah. Like I said, I couldn't care less about your
opinion of the book. I could try, but I would fail. All I wanted to do is make
sure the people didn't get the wrong impression of it, just because you don't
get it and think it's about "
old man discovers naughty things"
.
miketo wroteIn conclusion, I don't mind that you leapt to the
defense of SiaSL.
That's very gracious of you.
miketo wroteIt is an important work, and given our banter, I'm
betting that there will be people who seek it out who wouldn't otherwise have
read it.
Then my work here is done. To anyone who reads and enjoys "
Stranger"
- you're welcome.
miketo wroteI would much rather have people read and think than
sit around and watch reruns of "Pimp My Ride." But SiaSL is not for everyone
and it could be an unpleasant surprise to those not familiar with sf in general
and the themes of SiaSL in particular.
I agree it's not for everyone, but you seem to think it's not for the people
frequenting these forums. I'd rather have these people decide for themselves
rather than have it decided for them by such an arrogant person as you.
____________________________
devNull
