(urth) Inire as a hierodule

[brunians at brunians.org]

My appreciation for what you say cannot be expressed in words.

.


> I'll try to present my point of view in more general terms.
>
> When we connect real world dots, we don't do it guided by our impressions
> of
> how the order of the universe woud be neater. We do it according to how
> the
> connections may give us a new understanding of what's going on. You don't
> address a criminal case, for instance, by asking yourself what given
> connections might result in a more stylish architecture of the crime.
>
> Imagine if you were reading a mystery and your attempt to find out what
> had
> happened was based not on the story itself but on the type of person the
> author was more likely to prefer as a criminal, or the way a given
> solution
> would make the plot fall into some esoteric category you think the author
> is
> fond of.
>
> If I were the author I wouldn't like it. I'm here telling you a story,
> doing
> my best to make it lifelike or vivider than that, full of hard-crafted
> uniqueness, and there are you trying to make it all fit some stock model.
> Of
> course, a kindly author might not let show disappointment, if after all
> such
> exercises make the book enjoyable to you.
>
> I don't think good authors write cryptic books with the intention of
> having
> a legion of readers trying to figure out the author's thought processes or
> raw devices. The clues that are there are meant for the reader to figure
> out
> the world being described. The line between the two lies where the
> reader's
> endeavours address the story given (in itself, as if it were not art but a
> real chronicle), or the inferred artistic process.
>
> If I sound acrimonious it's not on purpose. It's just that I find your
> efforts quite good - probably better than I'd manage myself - but
> misguided.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>