tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post9221569825656229116..comments2023-09-30T14:54:49.597+02:00Comments on Realms Of Speculative Fiction: Meditation on a subject of...ThRiNiDiRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11235487104345529619noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post-53978389910792036282008-08-25T10:31:00.000+02:002008-08-25T10:31:00.000+02:00Remember the rights of the reader state that you c...Remember the rights of the reader state that you can put a book down at any time. If you choose not to finish reading something then it is perfectly ok for you to write a review of it. Maybe you should mention that you didn't finish it and why, but I think a sensible review can still be written. It can also be interesting to read why someone wasn't able to finish a particular book.<BR/>After all reviews are just an individuals opinion on what they have been reading.Petehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06096817906022705226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post-57779258782825751022008-08-07T03:21:00.000+02:002008-08-07T03:21:00.000+02:00Just write your reviews the way you want to write ...Just write your reviews the way you want to write them. I wouldn't concern worry too much about what the author says. They should be grateful you wrote a review on their book, whether you liked it or not, whether you read all of it or not.Barbara Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00610140328527165017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post-42001256906857260322008-08-06T17:48:00.000+02:002008-08-06T17:48:00.000+02:00Okay, well, in that case, it's clear that you ulti...Okay, well, in that case, it's clear that you ultimately misunderstand me, what I've said, and where I'm coming from. As such, there's no reason to continue this back and forth. Have a good one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post-54232023044012539622008-08-06T10:33:00.000+02:002008-08-06T10:33:00.000+02:00Mr. Walker, I think that everybody that had read t...Mr. Walker, I think that everybody that had read the entire discussion (as did I and hopefully others through the links provided) understands the circumstances in which your words were written. I dare say we also understand what you tried to say, whether we agree with you or not. <BR/>I've quoted (parts of) your comments because I think they represent one of the most forceful sides in a debate, and tried to show that even if I find your suggestion quite reasonable on the one hand, I must on the other decline it, basically because of a personal principle. <BR/><BR/>But that does not mean that <B>I</B> do not find the <B>tone</B> of your words <B>in said paragraph</B> scary for before mentioned reasons.<BR/><BR/>edit: I've spent some time with a dictionary (not being a native speaker) and found a better word than scary for my impression of said paragraph: <B>overbearing</B><BR/><BR/>[<I>1. domineering; dictatorial; haughtily or rudely arrogant. (@ dictionary.com)</I>]<BR/><BR/>So now I'm thinking of changing the post suitably.<BR/><BR/>Although I realise you've meant it as a joke you are correct. It is quite possible that such a reaction tells more of me than it does of you. I dislike such a tone very much no matter where I run into it or who uses it, and must therefore disagree. This is not a matter of setting up straw men – some kind of artificial, overblown fears – but a very serious matter that shows a certain frame of mind I personally find very dangerous, but admittedly has nothing to do with the current debate (and was therefore put in brackets). <BR/><BR/>I'd also like to end with "no hard feelings" as well, but I'd be lying. I feel quite strongly about such things, so I'll end with: <I>nothing personal</I>, Mr. Walker.BlindManhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01682828577566561936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post-13534272510804014252008-08-05T19:36:00.000+02:002008-08-05T19:36:00.000+02:00Hmm.... Sometimes the "blogosphere" can seem (and ...Hmm.... Sometimes the "blogosphere" can seem (and especially feel like) some kind of theater of the absurd.<BR/><BR/>The idea that anything I've said is "selfrighteous" is kind of hilarious (to me). If anything, your reaction to my suggestions says a great deal about you, young butterfly. (Couldn't help myself. It was a silver platter!) (And said in good fun.)<BR/><BR/>But, since you decided to make such a judgement based on statements taken out of context, allow me to put my words back into context.<BR/><BR/>I wrote:<BR/><BR/>"By setting this kind of standard, I think that you can free yourself from feeling any guilt, or worry, about writing whatever you want."<BR/><BR/>...in direct response to something Aidan wrote in the post I was commenting on at the time:<BR/><BR/>"I struggled with the idea of writing a review for The Dragons of Babel. Was I qualified to give one? Was it unfair to Mr. Swanwick’s kindness in sending me a free copy of the novel? Was it fair to my readers? In the end, I decided not to write that review, and I’ve regretted it ever since."<BR/><BR/>and this, regarding "The Ten Thousand":<BR/><BR/>"In fact, I debated with myself for quite some time whether I even would write the review, knowing that the situation was a bit of an ethical dilemma."<BR/><BR/>Anyone can go back and read the post/thread that came from and see for themselves. Seen in context, I think it's clear that I, grumpy old patronizing Robert, was <I>actually</I> making an honest suggestion to Aidan from the perspective of an author in the spirit of finding a solution to the dilemma (brought up by Aidan, a reviewer) which could be mutually acceptable, and even beneficial, to both authors and reviewers.<BR/><BR/>The truth is that I'm actually not the bad guy in this little drama Blindman is setting up.<BR/><BR/>I sincerely appreciate that (in general) Blindman treated my statements fairly, but I did suspect there was some "straw man" action going on when he (imo, inexplicably) referred to something I said as "scary."<BR/><BR/>[From Wikipedia: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw man argument" is to describe a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view but is easier to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent (for example, deliberately overstating the opponent's position).]<BR/><BR/>Not trying to set up an argument here (heyzeus knows there are too many of those around already), but simply trying to clear up some (what I feel to be) misleading statements.<BR/><BR/>No hard feelings from my end, Blindman.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post-90874859647478017942008-08-05T08:22:00.000+02:002008-08-05T08:22:00.000+02:00What is scary is (at least to me) is your almost g...What is scary is (at least to me) is your almost guru like selfrighteousness and patronizing:<BR/>"There are some things you can't win against. But do as I say and you will know no fear, no worry. It's quite simple, you just have to..."BlindManhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01682828577566561936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-700851155622035345.post-42105136171842776722008-08-05T00:09:00.000+02:002008-08-05T00:09:00.000+02:00Howdy, Blindman. I'm kind of curious as to what yo...Howdy, Blindman. I'm kind of curious as to what you found "scary" about the "tone" you referred to in that one section... I can't fathom what could be inferred as "scary" about anything I've said...<BR/><BR/>Boo! (Now that's scary.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com