BARD@MIT-XX.ARPA (08/30/85)
From: Bard Bloom <BARD@MIT-XX.ARPA> > But I'm > also secure enough to recognize that some people have put a lot of > work into reading the "Cantos" and are deeply rewarded for their > efforts. It's just not my cup of tea. Why do you and some of your > cohorts of a similar mind in this group refuse to grant us "Art > Snobs" a similar courtesy? My first impressions of this firefight were that various "Art Snobs" were not granting "Good-Read Snobs" (to use a parallel term without intending either term to be especially accurate) that right; that they were being rather extreme in their claims that the standards of "Art" were the only worthy ones. Since then, much umbrage has been given, and much taken; probably most of the lack of courtesy is reaction to excessive nastiness of the other side. It can't be intended personally, for we are all of us honorable men. Of course, the battle has been going on for longer than this newsgroup has existed, and probably predates half of the world's major religions as well. (-; maybe it is one of them ;-) But then, we're having fun trying to stuff each other in our favorite teacups. Pax VAXque vobiscum, Bard -------
wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) (09/03/85)
In article <3477@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> rti-sel!mcnc!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!columbia!topaz!BARD BARD@MIT-XX.ARPA writes: >My first impressions of this firefight were that various "Art Snobs" were >not granting "Good-Read Snobs" (to use a parallel term without intending >either term to be especially accurate) that right; that they were being >rather extreme in their claims that the standards of "Art" were the only >worthy ones. My reactions have always been to extreme statements on the part of the "Good-Read Snobs." Those of you with long memories will recall that my first posting on quality and fiction predated the whole Davis Tucker series that seems to have upset so many people in this group, and was a reaction to Steve Brust's claim that most good writing today is issuing from the pens (word processors?) of SF writers. Since then, I've seen great hostility on both sides of the fence. So please don't mislead newcomers to this controversy by claiming that the initial extremity was perpetrated by an "Art Snob." My OWN first impressions were that the "Good-Read Snobs" started it; c'mon, fight like a mensch. :-) >Since then, much umbrage has been given, and much taken; >probably most of the lack of courtesy is reaction to excessive nastiness of >the other side. It can't be intended personally, for we are all of us >honorable men. You obviously haven't seen the nasty mail messages I've occasionally received. :-) >But then, we're having fun trying to stuff each other in our favorite >teacups. One man's nastiness is another's debating style. As I pointed out in one of my innumerable postings on this subject, one can be critical of something and still like it. Why, some of my best friends voted for Reagan in the last election (I wouldn't want my sister to marry one, though :-). -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly