Sozobe, if you think that X is a weak or sloppy or bad writer, you should be able to SAY so, without worrying about the hurt feelings of those who may or may not agree with you. I am always civil--I have NEVER attacked anyone personally for disagreeing with my tastes. On the contrary, I have now been attacked personally myself for days for saying that Pynchon is overrated. So I have to wonder, who is being civil and who is not???
I read literature, that I enjoy. If it's not high-brow enough for others, all I can say is "So what"!
larry richette wrote:Maybe. But if you say you dislike a writer someone else likes, that is not personally belittling them. If we can't express critical judgements we might as well give up on A2K.
I think you've provided one solution, Larry.
I do think there are ways to express our opinions about books/politics/food/shoes/religion without appearing to be critical of people with differing opinions. Not an easy task, but possible.
A2K is a very different site than Abuzz. Members are asked to hold themselves to a particular standard of behaviour in debating and discussion. Good behaviour appears to valued more highly than academic rigour. Sometimes I find it limiting and frustrating. I also find it frustrating that some members appear to be held to a different standard than others. When it annoys me too much, I 'walk away' for a while. That's the way I've chosen to live with A2K.
ahhhh, good that i 'refreshed' - I'll agree with New Haven on that. In terms of books, I like what I like, love what I love, and if no one agrees, tough.
ehBeth wrote:Good behaviour appears to valued more highly than academic rigour.
Eh?
I see the ideal as both. Ideals are rarely achieved, but is anyone threatening to kick Larry out?
I personally haven't had any run-ins with Larry (have I? If so, I forget), but I do understand how some people have taken umbrage. If he has no problem with giving umbrage, that's fine. But I disagree with the idea that that's the only way to have an academically rigorous discussion.
sozobe - i offered an opinion about the site.
Hmmmm - I think one can certainly have very stringent and lively debates about literature without being personally attacking.
It involves, however, to my mind, not just saying stuff like this is dreck which I liked when I was a callow youth, but I have now grown out of - it is crap.
In my experience, if I had said such things without solid back-up and analysis I would have been thrown out of my first year English turorials at university.
Larry - looking at your posts it seems to me you have a tendency to come in, say you think something is crap, in a way that implies only a brain-dead idiot would like it, give little analysis to back up your view, and move on. I do not think anyone objects to your opinion- it is more the implication that only an idiot would hold a different one. This certainly often acts as a conversation stopper.
On a number of occasions I have asked you to talk about why you hold this opinion - I am not aware of your generally answering my queries. I am often unable to challenge you, because your focus is on American literature, which is not an area of great knowledge of mine, but I am often interested in why you think as you do.
I have not read all your posts - but this is the impression I get. If you disagree, then I am happy to go back and have a longer look.
If that is what you wanna do, fine, so be it. I happen not to think that is literary DISCUSSION though. I personally do not find this manner particularly distressing - just not conducive to fruitful and interesting exchange of ideas.
The way in which you have posed this question is a case in point.
It implies that if you love literature, you will want to discuss it in the way that you do.
Fine. Some people will want to discuss in this manner - good luck to them. Many will not. You seem to imply this means they do not love literature. This is an example of the kind of discussion method that many find unhelpful - it reads as your way, or the dumb way.
I would not normally comment on an individual in this way, unless in a personal conversation with someone known to me.
However, you did open this topic - presumably because you wished to have a dialogue about literary discussion and your manner of conducting it.
Very well-stated, dlowan.
personally i think men are from earth, women are from earth. both mars and venus seem to be uninhabitable. earth may be next.
Dlowan--If I give an opinion of a book or a writer, I ALWAYS back it up with a substantive argument. I NEVER say "this is crap" or the equivalent and leave it at that. In the case of my now-imfamous Pynchon comment, I specifically said that while I found one of his novels amusing, I thought that he was a sloppy writer, a bad stylist, and therefore unreadable. You can't get much more specific than that without actually quoting bad sentences from the novel in question. So, Dlowan, you are totally misrepresenting both the style and substance of my posts. You have NEVER challenged me to specify a point when I have refused to do so. I defy you to find an example of such an exchange. Shame on you for such an intellectually dishonest attack on me.
Larry, I did a quick search -- keyword "Larry", posted by dlowan -- and found this:
dlowan wrote:Larry - could you enlarge upon your assessment of the film as well done crap?
Do you consider all horror thus, or just this film and "The Silence of the Lambs"?
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=107753&highlight=larry#107753
dlowan wrote:Good heavens Larry - do you really think so? Why? To me that repetition is the soul of that couplet.
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=92261&highlight=larry#92261
dlowan wrote:Larry - I have read nowhere near enough Auden- it would be interesting if you began a thread with that as your thesis -and illustrated it with poems to argue your case -at least it would be interesting to me.
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=92187&highlight=larry#92187
None of those were responded to.
Hmmm - I thought there were more examples - but perhaps there are not. I am aware of one occasion when you answered me, Larry - but I have fallen, perhaps with insufficient evidence, into the habit of not expecting a response when I ask a question of you.
As to this comment: " I thought that he was a sloppy writer, a bad stylist, and therefore unreadable. You can't get much more specific than that without actually quoting bad sentences from the novel in question."
Perhaps part of the conflict is a confluence of two things. Firstly - part of my literary "training" if you will was to take the view that, if you were slamming a writer or a book (which is a relatively easy thing to do and popular among students) it behoved you to have good evidence for your view and to demonstrate it.
It is likely, I guess, that my expectations of evidence in dismissing a writer or a work are too high for such a forum, since I suppose it IS too much to expect an analysis of a piece of writing to demonstrate the criticisms - too long to type in for one.
C'est la vie.
(dlowan, that was just what I came up with in a quickie search. I stopped at 3 since that seemed to adequately refute "You have NEVER challenged me to specify a point when I have refused to do so," but there may well be more examples.)
Ah well - nemmind - we shall all go on - doubtless satisfied with our own selves, and occasionally irritated by others, into the sunset! LOL.
You people have way too much time on your hands. Imagine doing keyword searches of A2K to try to make me look bad! Why don't you do something useful with all this mad energy and resentment, like writing a poem or organizing a political protest? It is wasted on the trivia of thnis board.
Uh, "quick" means 2-3 minutes, tops. Click search. Type "Larry". Type "dlowan". Bingo. If you can write poetry or organize political protests in that time, I'm impressed.
Not trying to make you look bad, trying to show that at least some of your statements are demonstrably false. Was curious as to what the response would be -- "Way too much time on your hands" was not quite what I hoped for.
But, no biggie. I liked your latest response on the Virginia Woolf thread, have seen other posts of similar quality, and just would personally would like to see more of that and less of the "crap" stuff. But as dlowan said, that's something I offer only in the context of your requests for feedback, and I think it's pretty clear that you don't actually care what we think of your discussion style. And that's fine.
"Demonstrably false" implies that I am a liar. For somebody who claims not to want to cause trouble, you certainly make some reckless statements. Your famous search yielded exactly ONE post contradicting my earlier statement. Big deal, Sozobe.
Whatever. "Shame on you for an intellectually dishonest attack on me" didn't sit well with me. I showed that it wasn't intellectually dishonest. That's all.
That comment wasn't directed at you, Sozobe. If you get your kicks fighting with me on this thread, I feel sorry for you. In fact I feel sorry for you period because you seem to be a very petty and spiteful individual.
