column: EUOLogy #6

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

reference: http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=866

ah... EUOL and I have argued this many many times. We'll never agree, though I think we don't disagree nearly so much as our arguments imply. Too bad I'm too tired and sick to go into it

[House of Mustard]

EUOL, why can't you just italicize titles instead of capitalize?  When you said PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST AS A YOUNG MAN, I first thought you were adding some massive emphasis to the phrase -- BAM! right in the face.

Knock it off.

Otherwise, I enjoyed your article.

[EUOL]

Yeah.  I figured that since it's something we've gone the rounds on in the forums, it was interesting to deserve a column on.

[Brenna]

"Everyone things he's excellent from a technical standpoint"

Whoops!

Also, interesting EUOLogy. I think Stephen King should now write a book called Og Like Milk.

Except he'd probably introduce the characters to the concept of constant, unnecessary swearing, so I probably wouldn't end up reading it after all.

"If no man's opinion is more valuable than another's"

I'm not exactly sure how I feel about this, actually. In some cases, I do respect some people's opinion much more than another, and believe that their opinion is more valuable.  
That's not to say that the less valuable one isn't valid or important, just that one does, in fact, hold more worth than the other. Granted, this only applies in a few select cases--according to me, anyway.

[Entsuropi]

You all know that Tolkien would win. He would arrive with 10,000 orcs and slaughter the both of them.

[EUOL]

Brenna,

I mean my statement about the value of opinions as a general idea, not as relating to specific cases.  For instance, I may respect someone's opinion more.  However, I don't think that actually makes it more valuable than anyone else's opinion.  It's their opinion, and they have a right to it--and when we say that one person's informed opinion is more valuable than someone else's, I think we're in a dangerous place.

There are restrictions on this, of course.  I mean it to be an informed opinion, and about something the person has a right to speak upon.  For instance, my opinion on an election in France wouldn't be very valuable.  However, if two people were to read a book and have different opinions of it, I don't think you can justify claiming one as more valuable than the other.  

The guy I was talking to--a creative writer at BYU--actually said something to the effect of "I guess it's good that not all books are like Joyce, since most people aren't intelligent enough to understand him.  There has to be something for everyone else."  He's a nice guy, and he said it without arrogance in his voice, but I was dumbfounded.  He essentially said "If you are intelligent, you will like the books that I like.  If you're not, you can like these lesser creations."

It's that idea that offends me.  He thinks his opinion is more valuable than other people's, and he assumes that people who don't think the same way he does aren't as intelligent as he is.  He actually believes this.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

the caps problem should have been fixed BEFORE it was even blurbed. Otherwise someone was editing at the same time I was. So, whoever was doing that. STOP IT. I don't want to ahve to correct everything twice.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

also, who put in all those <p/> tags with that afterward slash. That wasn't there on my first edit. Who's screwing with the articles?

[stacer]

Sorry, I copyedited it before I ran out for errands, and probably screwed up something. I didn't do anything but change a dash, but from now on I'll wait till it's actually posted. It just seems silly to copyedit after everyone's read it, and I was in a hurry to do it before I left.

Don't hate me, SE!

[EUOL]

Be nice, SE.  

The <p/> tags were in my original.  Sprig told me that this is the way to do paragraphing, since you don't have to put both a <p> and a </p>.  You can just put a <p/> at the beginning of a paragraph, and it makes everything nice and pretty, and dosen't confuse the computer.

Oh, and HoM--it's the industry standard to ALL CAPS for book titles and let the copyeditors change what they want.  What industry do you work in, and when are you going to join the rest of us?

[Brenna]

Okay, then, that makes much more sense to me, though I do still think there are exceptions.

I also hate when people basically tell me that
"If you are intelligent, you will like the books/ideas/politics/topics that I like.  If you're not, you can like these lesser creations."

That's why I almost never enter into discussions on politics or other sensitive topics anymore--I am rarely given the courtesy of explaining my point of view before being brushed off as stupid/uninformed/whatever.

[Entsuropi]

Who put the Rage pills into SE's food?

[EUOL]

Well, he did have to redo an edit of an article.  That would be pretty annoying.  I guess it just hasn't come up that two people would be editing the article at the same time.

I guess there should just be a rule.  Once you post 'It's up' on the 'call for articles' page, nobody bot SE is allowed to touch it.  SE edits it to his satisfaction, then posts a blurb.  After that, Stacer edits it.

[stacer]

Works for me.

Brenna, I agree. She and I were just discussing this on IM--there's a discussion going on on my child-lit listserv in which a number of members just discovered that Orson Scott Card is LDS. Then some people pointed out his "Hypocrites of Homosexuality" essay (from 1990, Sunstone magazine) in which he states his views on homosexuals in the Church who demand their orientation/actions be validated, not sinful.

Most of the people on the list have now decided that Card is a hatemongering homophobe, whose books they'll put in the category of "books I love, author I hate." And so now it's turned into a huge long diatribe, one after the other ranting on how much they now dislike Card as a person. I don't feel I can wade into that seething-ness and say what I want to say and be understood.

More on topic with the article, I agree with EUOL that the attitude that you have to have a certain level of intelligence to appreciate certain works is bunk. As I look at denser works with a more critical eye, I do find I can appreciate them despite not liking them as a story. But that's not the same as taste. For example, I'm reading Water-Babies, which is about the dumbest book I ever read, and most critics agree, as a story. But as a Victorian work that opened the genre of fantasy, at least for children (EUOL, I swear, it was about 100 years before you claim), it's an important book, and can be appreciated on other levels besides as a good story.

I guess. I still say it's one of the most boring books I ever read.

[stacer]

EUOL, on your website it's linked as EUOLogy #5. Is it 5 or 6?

Oh, um... nevermind. I see. It IS #5.