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

Re: [mythsoc] Joseph Pearce on Tolkien

Expand Messages
  • David Bratman
    If you had taken my plain meaning, you wouldn t have tried to correct me by telling me what I already said. You completely misunderstood the context of the
    Message 1 of 53 , Apr 9, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      If you had taken my "plain meaning," you wouldn't have tried to correct me by telling me what I already said. You completely misunderstood the context of the words "roundabout" and "relevant." And if you don't think that "winding your foundation garments into uncomfortable shapes that only a contortionist might envy" is belligerent, I shudder at what you might think _is_ belligerent. I would have thought you are the sufferer from projection, but I was not rude enough to say so; I guess there was no point in that either.

      Lastly, since you allude to your so-called expertise, your last post on the subject of source studies was complete nonsense, creating distinctions and categories with no exterior existence; it deserved no reply and got none. And it is not just me who says so: genuine experts on source studies confirmed that my decades in Tolkien studies had not led me astray here; I will leave it to them if they want to say so themselves. But if I were one of those standing to the side of the fire-breathing dragon, instead of being in the direct path of its noxious flames, I would be hesitant to draw its fire.


      -----Original Message-----
      >From: Larry Swain <theswain@...>
      >Sent: Apr 9, 2011 5:40 PM
      >To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Joseph Pearce on Tolkien
      >
      >
      >On Sat, 09 Apr 2011 17:15 -0700, "David Bratman"
      ><dbratman@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >>>"As on previous occasions, Larry Swain has so completely
      >misunderstood what I said and been so unnecessarily belligerent about
      >it, that there's
      >no point in trying to clarify matters any further. I'm sorry I attempted
      >to clarify his thinking in the first place; it's obviously impossible.<<
      >
      >Yes, the plain meaning of your words obviously indicates you meant
      >something else. As on previous occasions, I deem this but projection on
      >your part; it seems to happen every time you venture to comment in
      >fields outside your expertise but well within mine. Apparently asking
      >you to take my comments as helpful and informative equals belligerence
      >in some quarters. Let the readers judge.
      >
      >Larry Swain
      >
      >
      >--
      >http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service
      >
      >
      >
      >------------------------------------
      >
      >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.orgYahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
    • Darrell A. Martin
      Jason: I think your objection to Pearce, in that he did not mention Tolkien s disavowal of something he (Pearce) stated as a fact, is on target. My own focus
      Message 53 of 53 , Apr 12, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Jason:

        I think your objection to Pearce, in that he did not mention Tolkien's
        disavowal of something he (Pearce) stated as a fact, is on target. My
        own focus -- which is why I early on changed the Subject line to remove
        Pearce -- was on whether or not Tolkien's disavowal was definitive.

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