I looked up Joachim Boaz's review of THERE WILL BE TIME, and I'm hot quite satisfied with it. My chief criticism being that he was too dismissive of Caleb wallis and the post War of Judgment state he founded. Yes, Wallis was a bad who did bad things, but he was also a strong, able, and masterful man. One whom Havig admired even as he worked to overthrow the Sachem.
Unfortunately, it's not that simple! Many bad men have also been shrewd and able--the problem has been them using their abilities in bad ways or for evil ends.
Oh I deleted Sean's sad comment, he's now apologizing for a random racist villain who's supposed to be an evil racist villain! Moments ago he was apologizing for Anderson's own sexism.
Guys stay away. And please don't link my reviews. Engaging with the followers of the Poul Anderson fan club is, on the whole, a rather dismal experience.
It's your privilege to prefer Authors X, Y, or Z, and to criticize them for their alleged "sexism." Next, it was FALSE (gently put) to accuse me of defending the racist villain of Anderson's THERE WILL BE TIME. I reject what you said about me.
OK. How did the issue of sexism come in? The trouble with deleting comments is that some of us do not know what was said. I will delete a comment (except by accident!) only if it contains offensive language, e.g., if someone here expresses belief in racial equality and someone else responds with racist abuse. But that does not happen here so it is not an issue.
I have checked. The tidier version of your first comment in this combox is still on Joachim Boaz's blog. Was there a second comment that he has deleted?
No, that "tidier" version of my first comment in this combox was the only one I wrote in the Boaz combox for discussing that review of THERE WILL BE TIME. And, as you can see, I said nothing about "sexism" in either version. If Mr. Boaz said he had deleted that comment I don't know why it's still there.
Re-Anderson's sexism and Sean's stance on it -- Sean, refresh your memory of your comments (that utterly dodge my responses) on my review of Tau Zero which was my first interaction with the followers of this site and with you.
The problem with appreciation clubs is as follows. Most members are willing to defend every work as genius. And every flaw as part of plan... and every critique as an attack on the very essence of what makes you adore said author. Whenever I read Sean's comments in our "discussion" of Anderson's virulent sexism (which is pretty bad even for the 60s) in Tau Zero I keep that in mind.
That said, defending a racist villain in There Will Be Time meant to be a racist villain as your only response to my review is just downright creepy (which Paul also appears to have felt with his reiteration of how he was "a bad man" if I am reading those comments correctly) so that's the only comment I have deleted.
And yes, I moderate the comments I receive. As every site should.
Sean, feel free to read a review I wrote of someone other than Anderson. You'll get a far better perspective on my modus operandi (which again, you don't seem to get. hint hint: I'm a historian with a PhD interested in the 50s-60s and charting an era including the views of SF authors on race, gender, trauma, memory, etc. and that means pointing out what stinks as well as what's brilliant).
I will try to keep this brief. First, I deny Poul Anderson has ever been "sexist" in any ways indicating contempt for women. I have never seen anything in any of his stories, novels, essays to make me think he ever demeaned, belittled, or put down women. Next, for my own information and not because I care about refuting you, I will be looking up what Sandra Miesel, a woman and a deeply read commentator on Anderson, said was his view of women in her monograph AGAINST TIME'S ARROW: THE HIGH CRUSADE OF POUL ANDERSON and others of her essays.
You made me VERY angry by falsely accusing me of defending the racist villain in Anderson's novel THERE WILL BE TIME. I denied and rejected that slander. You then compounded your offensiveness by repeating the falsehood. Since I am a guest in Dr. Shackley's blog I will not use the far stronger words I might have used.
Your slander also made no sense to me because I was thinking ONLY about THERE WILL BE TIME when I made that comment about the villain in that story, and not about TAU ZERO.
T even thought that if this had been 200 years ago I would have challenged you to a duel, because of your insulting falsehood. However, the Catholic Church forbids her children to take part in any way in duels, and I hope I would have obeyed,
Unless you wish to make amends U would consider it a courtesy on your part if you no longer addressed any comments to me.
22 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I looked up Joachim Boaz's review of THERE WILL BE TIME, and I'm hot quite satisfied with it. My chief criticism being that he was too dismissive of Caleb wallis and the post War of Judgment state he founded. Yes, Wallis was a bad who did bad things, but he was also a strong, able, and masterful man. One whom Havig admired even as he worked to overthrow the Sachem.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Remember once before Joachim preferred us to discuss his blog on his blog?
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Then I should have left my first comment here in Boaz's blog. Got it.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
More generally, giving my view rather than commenting on Joachim's, I don't agree with "Wallis was a bad man but..." He was a bad man period.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Unfortunately, it's not that simple! Many bad men have also been shrewd and able--the problem has been them using their abilities in bad ways or for evil ends.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But it is still not a "but."
Paul.
Oh I deleted Sean's sad comment, he's now apologizing for a random racist villain who's supposed to be an evil racist villain! Moments ago he was apologizing for Anderson's own sexism.
Guys stay away. And please don't link my reviews. Engaging with the followers of the Poul Anderson fan club is, on the whole, a rather dismal experience.
Joachim,
Apologies that linking to your review has been a sad experience. At your request, I will not link again.
Paul.
Mr. Boaz:
It's your privilege to prefer Authors X, Y, or Z, and to criticize them for their alleged "sexism." Next, it was FALSE (gently put) to accuse me of defending the racist villain of Anderson's THERE WILL BE TIME. I reject what you said about me.
Sean M. Brooks
Kaor, Paul!
I apologize to you for in any way causing you trouble or embarrassment. If you believe it necessary, I accept any reproof you give me.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I had not read the comment that was deleted so I cannot say anything further.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Basically a tidier version of my first comment in this combox.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
OK. How did the issue of sexism come in? The trouble with deleting comments is that some of us do not know what was said. I will delete a comment (except by accident!) only if it contains offensive language, e.g., if someone here expresses belief in racial equality and someone else responds with racist abuse. But that does not happen here so it is not an issue.
Paul.
Sean,
I have checked. The tidier version of your first comment in this combox is still on Joachim Boaz's blog. Was there a second comment that he has deleted?
(Getting confused here.)
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
No, that "tidier" version of my first comment in this combox was the only one I wrote in the Boaz combox for discussing that review of THERE WILL BE TIME. And, as you can see, I said nothing about "sexism" in either version. If Mr. Boaz said he had deleted that comment I don't know why it's still there.
Ad astra! Sean
Testing.
Sean,
I tested because one comment went off.
I wonder if there was a post from someone else whom Joachim mistook for you?
Paul.
Deleting comments that we dislike is not a good idea especially if it leaves others wondering what went on.
Re-Anderson's sexism and Sean's stance on it -- Sean, refresh your memory of your comments (that utterly dodge my responses) on my review of Tau Zero which was my first interaction with the followers of this site and with you.
The problem with appreciation clubs is as follows. Most members are willing to defend every work as genius. And every flaw as part of plan... and every critique as an attack on the very essence of what makes you adore said author. Whenever I read Sean's comments in our "discussion" of Anderson's virulent sexism (which is pretty bad even for the 60s) in Tau Zero I keep that in mind.
That said, defending a racist villain in There Will Be Time meant to be a racist villain as your only response to my review is just downright creepy (which Paul also appears to have felt with his reiteration of how he was "a bad man" if I am reading those comments correctly) so that's the only comment I have deleted.
And yes, I moderate the comments I receive. As every site should.
Sean, feel free to read a review I wrote of someone other than Anderson. You'll get a far better perspective on my modus operandi (which again, you don't seem to get. hint hint: I'm a historian with a PhD interested in the 50s-60s and charting an era including the views of SF authors on race, gender, trauma, memory, etc. and that means pointing out what stinks as well as what's brilliant).
Joachim,
Thank you for clarifying that you were referring to the TAU ZERO review.
Paul.
OK. I can now see that Sean's comment has gone from the THERE WILL BE TIME review. (There was a delayed response or something.)
Mr. Boaz:
I will try to keep this brief. First, I deny Poul Anderson has ever been "sexist" in any ways indicating contempt for women. I have never seen anything in any of his stories, novels, essays to make me think he ever demeaned, belittled, or put down women. Next, for my own information and not because I care about refuting you, I will be looking up what Sandra Miesel, a woman and a deeply read commentator on Anderson, said was his view of women in her monograph AGAINST TIME'S ARROW: THE HIGH CRUSADE OF POUL ANDERSON and others of her essays.
You made me VERY angry by falsely accusing me of defending the racist villain in Anderson's novel THERE WILL BE TIME. I denied and rejected that slander. You then compounded your offensiveness by repeating the falsehood. Since I am a guest in Dr. Shackley's blog I will not use the far stronger words I might have used.
Your slander also made no sense to me because I was thinking ONLY about THERE WILL BE TIME when I made that comment about the villain in that story, and not about TAU ZERO.
T even thought that if this had been 200 years ago I would have challenged you to a duel, because of your insulting falsehood. However, the Catholic Church forbids her children to take part in any way in duels, and I hope I would have obeyed,
Unless you wish to make amends U would consider it a courtesy on your part if you no longer addressed any comments to me.
Sean M. Brooks
Post a Comment