Other than the "intense game played in midair" part, isn't that the plot of like half the kids fantasy novels in existence?
I think that was pretty much OSC's point, sarcastically expressed. His main point seems to be this:
If Steven Vander Ark, the author of Lexicon, had written fiction that he claimed was original, when it was actually a rearrangement of ideas taken from the Harry Potter books, then she'd have a case.
But Lexicon is intended only as a reference book for people who have already paid for their copies of Rowling's books. Even though the book is not scholarly, it certainly falls within the realm of scholarly comment.
Yeah I actually think Rowling is wrong on this - just not for any of the reasons OSC said. Stop being on my side Fucko!
I saw OSC speak at a bookstore. There were a huge number of things he said that were sort of ???? but DH and I were ROTFL at one bit -- he claimed that SF was the only genre where anyone was doing anything new with the novel, but he didn't really explain this. However - he then went onto to explain the current literary novel - we meet a guy in his 20's - not good, not bad, but in no way shape or form taking any control of her life - he drifts in to a job , drifts into a marriage, just floating along with the current until one day in his 40's something terrible happens and guy realizes his drifting is bad and he grows up. DH and I had just read a book like that. My feeling about OSC is that he makes some good points, however,he is so arragont and self centered that he has no judgment.
My feeling about OSC is that he makes some good points, however,he is so arragont and self centered that he has no judgment.
And then there's the problem of his insano-extreme views on homosexuality and how it's destroying America.
Yeah I actually think Rowling is wrong on this - just not for any of the reasons OSC said. Stop being on my side Fucko!
Snerk. Very much this. I can just live with sincere people of good will who disagree with me, but what's with obnoxious little shits who are on my side?! (Speaking generally here--I haven't studied the Rowling issue enough to have a strong opinion.)
My feeling about OSC is that he makes some good points, however,he is so arragont and self centered that he has no judgment.
This, too. He never seems to stop at, "Here's my opinion, and here's some evidence to back it up." It's more, "Here's my opinion, and anyone who disagrees is idiotic and/or immoral." (With or without evidence to back himself up.)
Writers Who Aren't Full of Shit:
If Ray Bradbury doesn't qualify to be on that list, I don't want to know. I wish to live in ignorant bliss.
OSC is a hot fluttering mess of logical fallacies.
Emma Bull, not full of shit. Jane Espenson, also.
Does it count if the writer is full of the same shit as you?
Cause I totally related to David Simon gift-wrapping his shitlist and taking it on the road.
But it might be some kind of *bull* shit
