Posted by: Alexander | http://www.cafeina.org | Wed Jan 23 22:49:38 2002
Interesting. That explains why those books are so crap and other less-polished and harder-to-read books have much more value
Posted by: Jimbob | http://the-fix.org/ | Thu Jan 24 02:58:28 2002
Bah, elitest bullshit. People who come up with ideas like that are of the "if it's not difficult and challenging, it's not art" mindset. No-one ever said reading had to be difficult. Just because a novel isn't a post-modern critical analysis of the recontectualized metaphor for gender identity doesn't make it a "McNovel". Dissing Stephen King is like dissing Charles Dickens. It is very good writing; occasionally something good <i>does</i> deserve to hit the mainstream.
Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org | Thu Jan 24 04:12:42 2002
Good point, Jimbob.
Though, IMHO, elitism gets a bad name. The world's so full of crap that if you don't swallow it, you are by definition elitist. Disapproval of "mass culture" like McDonalds and reality TV may be considered elitist.
Or, to quote Randall Graves, "I believe in the philosophy of a ruling class, because I rule".
Posted by: egg | http://egglog.tripod.com/ | Fri Jan 25 10:10:40 2002
Don't blame Strunk and White. I think it has to do with the law of diminishing returns.
Want to say something? Do so here.
Note to spammers: This comment system applies the rel=nofollow attribute to the poster's URL and all links. Posting links to this page will not improve their search engine rankings.
Please keep comments on topic and to the point. Inappropriate comments may be deleted.
Note that markup is stripped from comments; URLs will be automatically converted into links.
Posted by: Colin | http://www.onepointzero.com/ | Wed Jan 23 01:28:02 2002
Coming soon: the 'no-style' plugin for Microsoft Word.