Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

on or off-topic

Expand Messages
  • David Lenander
    Jim: As much as I like the people on this list, including David B, Carl, John R, Mike Foster, Janet and the many others whom I ve never met, sometimes I m a
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 3 9:26 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Jim:

      As much as I like the people on this list, including David B, Carl,
      John R, Mike Foster, Janet and the many others whom I've never met,
      sometimes I'm a little annoyed by the omnipresent topic of Tolkien. So
      I'd be delighted to see posts on any subject besides Tolkien, as much
      as I love Tolkien. Incidentally, the people who've recently come to
      Myth Soc Rivendell Discussion Group meetings from TheOneRing.net
      fandom have actually read and liked the book, as well as the movie, and
      I've been thrilled to have them reinvigorate some of our discussions.
      I don't know, yet, if they'll all stick with us to discuss Charles
      Williams and Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman, but some read Beowulf,
      and we're planning another sort of Tolkien: "The Monsters & the
      Critics," for a future discussion.

      I don't know that I would describe Donaldson's work in quite the way
      you do, but I did read his original four books or so, and I think there
      are many interesting things to discuss about them. He had some great
      ideas, and we could even discuss or perhaps argue about artistic
      decisions he made. He also was a guest of honor at an earlier Mythcon,
      and while I missed that one, many have since talked about what a nice
      guy he was, and several authors (I think Patricia McKillip, for one)
      have mentioned a debt to him in their own development. I think there
      must be many in the Society who liked and admired his work. Actually, I
      admire some aspects of it, myself.

      And just because Carl doesn't want to hear discussions about the
      artistic achievement or failure of a major fantasy motion picture
      (apart from its relationship to Tolkien's original novel) doesn't mean
      that you can't discuss them here. You could also discuss major fantasy
      motion pictures like _Spirited Away_ here, regardless of how far they
      might be from any direct Inklings component. Try to label your comments
      in the subject line and Carl can skip them. (As I might, to be
      honest--so don't do what I do so often, lump together comments on
      Jackson, Tolkien and Donaldson. I might be sick of the former for now,
      but I wouldn't want to miss the latter).

      Incidentally, I have recently finished _A Hat Full of Sky_, getting
      ready for Terry Pratchet's guest of honor gig at Minicon, later this
      month, and I think it's a truly outstanding work. Much better than
      _The Wee Free Men_, and more accessible and immediate than _The Amazing
      Maurice . . .._. Discussion of the book would be entirely appropriate
      here.

      On Mar 3, 2005, at 9:20 AM, mythsoc@yahoogroups.com wrote:

      > Message: 23
      > Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 03:34:47 -0000
      > From: "karlstar2" <jalaubacker@...>
      > Subject: Re: Question about the ROTK extended
      > [ . . . .]
      > In fact, this reminds me of one of the authors I do feel produced
      > quality work, and that is Stephen R. Donaldson.
      >
      > How far off the topic of Tolkien are we allowed to stray?
      >
      > Jim
      David Lenander
      d-lena@... or david_lenander@...
      2095 Hamline Ave. N.
      Roseville, MN 55113
      651-292-8887 or 651-697-1807
      http://www.umn.edu/~d-lena/RIVENDELL.html
    • Carl F. Hostetter
      Just to be clear: I have no problem with (some) discussion of the movies as movies. What I wouldn t want to see is a flood of such. And what I _object_ to --
      Message 2 of 3 , Mar 3 10:09 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Just to be clear: I have no problem with (some) discussion of the
        movies as movies. What I wouldn't want to see is a flood of such. And
        what I _object_ to -- the _only_ thing I object to in the discussion so
        far -- is the notion that there is any obligation to avoid
        "discouraging" or even inadvertently possibly seeming to "discourage"
        movie-only-fans from participating in _this_ forum (as Bonnie was
        claiming). If people are "discouraged" by the sort of criticism of
        Jackson's treatment of Tolkien that occasioned Bonnie's warning, then
        they probably wouldn't enjoy this forum much anyways. In any event, I
        won't be muzzled in my criticism of Jackson's movies out of any concern
        for the feelings of movie-fans; unless, of course, the moderator makes
        me.
        You'll also note, David L., that I specifically pointed out that this
        forum is _not_ limited to discussion of Tolkien, which someone had
        implied was the case by a question of topicality (and further note that
        no one else bothered to do so).
        Oh, and just because David L. thinks it's OK to discuss any given topic
        in this forum doesn't make it on-topic for this forum. That is
        determined by the stated purpose of the forum (twice previously quoted)
        and by the moderator who enforces it (or not), not by either David L.
        or me. But my "vote" on the matter ought to have just as much weight as
        David L.'s or anyone else's, to the extent that the moderator cares
        about anyone's "vote". Certainly it is not in my power to prohibit
        _anything_ so far as this list goes; but I have just as much right as
        David L. to express my opinion on what is and what is not on topic.
      • Stolzi
        ... From: David Lenander
        Message 3 of 3 , Mar 3 1:12 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "David Lenander" <d-lena@...>

          >
          > As much as I like the people on this list, including David B, Carl,
          > John R, Mike Foster, Janet and the many others whom I've never met,

          :(
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.