kevin%logic.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (06/07/85)
From: kevin%logic.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Kevin LaRue -- You can hack anything you want with TECO and DDT) > In regard to the highly subjective test we are offered for > comparing books, I should like to mention an Asimov short story > titled (as best I recall) "The Immortal Bard." In the story, a > university physics professor tells an English professor of a time > machine he has built. Already, we learn, he has used it to bring > Shakespeare to the present. The gentleman was so fascinated to > learn that his works were still studied and performed that the > physicist enrolled him in the English professor's Shakespeare > course--which he proceeded to flunk. > In short, be careful when attributing brilliant craftmanship (sic) > and subtle imagry (sic) to a favored author. The writer concerned may > know nothing about it. Indeed, this reminds me of an Asimov anecdote (which was related by Asimov, but I don't remember where so I can't quote), something along the lines of: Asimov was a member of the audience at a lecture where, to support his thesis, the lecturer discussed one of Asimov's stories (no, I don't remember which one). As it turned out, the lecturer's ideas concerning the story in question didn't jive with Asimov's, so Asimov decided to liven things up a bit: he stood up and, after obtaining the lecturer's attention, stated that the lecturer's interpretation of the story couldn't possibly be correct because it had never entered the author's mind. Asimov supported this assertion by stating that he should know -- he was the author. The lecturer responded with the only possible reply: ``so?'' In relating this anecdote, Asimov stated that he agreed with the lecturer's response; as do I. Kevin