There is NO frelling evidence that Lewis Carroll was a pederast or a pedophile.

A man with a really weird emotional life, yes. Somebody who couldn't cope with post-puberty women, yes. But there's no evidence that he ever laid a hand on any of his little friends, many of whom spoke fondly of him in after years.

The original novel I'm working on is directly based off a fic in another fandom. I may need to change the heroine's name (even though she's an OC) because anyone who's read the fic will immediately go "Hey!"

Always assuming, of course, that the thing gets finished, much less published.

Way past the Card discussion, but I just finished his latest book, Magic Street and I was underwhelmed. (In spoilerfont for those who plan to read and don't want to be tainted) His attempt to write in an African-American voice made me cringe so many times. He tries to affect the tone of a middle-class black community with his characters attempting but failing to be "street", but it just comes off as badly written and sometimes downright racist. In his afterword, he apologizes for much of this, and I don't think he was, in any way, trying to be offensive yet I couldn't help being offended. I am interested in what others thought of it if anyone else has read it.

As others have said, his ideas for the book were excellent, but in the execution he comes up very short. More and more of his later novels are heavy-handed with thinly disguised Mormon morality, but I keep reading hoping to see a glimmer of The Worthing Chronicles or Ender's Game or even Treason. Politically, he's gotten so far to the right it's frightening. Yet it's hard to condemn a man who loves Firefly and Serenity so much.

Yet it's hard to condemn a man who loves Firefly and Serenity so much.

Why? I don't see what one has to do with the other.

Or did I miss tone?

Yet it's hard to condemn a man who loves Firefly and Serenity so much.

I was going to say. You weren't in the Veronica Mars thread for the "Hitler was a vegetarian" discussion?

I don't think he was, in any way, trying to be offensive yet I couldn't help being offended.

Intent to offend needn't be present for offense to be rightly taken. The endeavor you're describing sounds downright embarrassing, so offense may be the absolutely appropriate response.

Why? I don't see what one has to do with the other.

You're right, it doesn't. I just find it so weird that a man really, really gets what Joss is trying to do, and then can be so obtuse with regard to tolerance and the current administration. And I did skim over that discussion in VM, but Hitler being a vegetarian seems a little different than Hitler being a card-carrying member of PETA. The latter would freak me out much more.

Intent to offend needn't be present for offense to be rightly taken. The endeavor you're describing sounds downright embarrassing, so offense may be the absolutely appropriate response.

Oh it was. Not being African-American however, I feel strange judging how offensive his prose actually was. Which probably sounds silly. Like when non-Jews try and explain how anti-semitic Mel Gibson's film is but then say if they were Jewish they'd be really offended. I mean, it should be easy enough to determine if a film or story is objectively offensive, yet for some reason it isn't so easy. I don't think I'm explaining this well.

There is NO frelling evidence that Lewis Carroll was a pederast or a pedophile.

That he was a pedarast no, a pedophile (which deals with desire rather than neccesarily actions) - there is evidence. He maintained a secret stash of photos of nude little girls. That he took the photos, kept the photos, and kept them a secret, seems fairly strong evidence of at least the desire.

Somebody who couldn't cope with post-puberty women, yes.

Actually, once his family released his diaries, it turned out that he had several normal, healthy relationships with adult women. Some of them were women he'd photographed or known when they were little, so that put paid to the claim that once they hit puberty he couldn't cope, or wasn't interested.

Yes, he photographed pre-pubescent girls, and yes, the photos made me feel all squicky when I saw them. But apparently this hobby was fully accepted at the time, and it was only when he photographed or wanted to photograph pubescent girls that there were problems.

Now, we might say the whole society was pedophilic in that case, but whether Dodgson had a psychological or moral problem is not assured.

Even if he did, he took no action on it and did not incorporate it into his writing. OSC is active in his church and contributory to his political party; Pound was basically a propagandist for the fascii; Clancy contributes his time and money to the Republican party. I've no idea whether Tepper is still active with women's shelters, but all these authors incorporate their political and moral opinions into their writings.

And hey, Tepper often writes that being a Mormon is equivalent to being a pedophile, so full circle to Gus' argument!

For me it's a truth-in-advertising issue. I read Clancy and Tepper knowing that I'm going to be getting the authors' agendas shovelled down my throat, and I assume their fan bases read them BECAUSE of their agendas, not for great literary merit. OSC I was attracted to because I liked what I'd read of his science fiction, NOT because I wanted to read how Mormon doctrine fell on any given issue. When it became all-Mormon, all-the-time, I felt it was weaker than when he was an honest broker for his ideas. If that makes sense.

Wolfram, Nick read Magic Street and he really enjoyed it. Granted, he's not particularly sophisticated in his reading tastes, but it might be because he's 20. He said he identified with the main character so much that at some times during the book things that happened to the character depressed him. I don't think Nick knows anything about OSC personally, and he's a very liberal kid--more liberal than I.

Tepper often writes that being a Mormon is equivalent to being a pedophile

Is this one of those "all intercourse is rape" OTT headline-grabbers, or a serious opinion?