On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, Shachihoko wrote:

Permit me to play devil's advocate for a moment.

The defense has the bench.
 

There is *no* rule that says a writer has to uphold standards of grammar,
spelling, punctuation, etc.  There is no rule that says a writer has to
write *well*, or has to meet any standards of quality.  As Natalie
Goldberg put it in _Wild Mind_, "You are free to write the worst junk in
America." (Or in Canada, or Australia, or your city, or the world, or the
universe.

Dr. Thinker is free to write whatever junk he feels like.

By the same token, the FFML is free to tell him it's junk.

	So why are so many people taking off after Dr. Thinker? Goodness
knows *I* wrote a fairly scathing critique of one of his pieces, but since
then I've just let it go. Dr. Thinker's writing is, by most objective and
subjective standards, anywhere from bad to rotten to horrid to
(unprintable - no pun intended).
	*But that doesn't mean he has to fix it.*

This is true. For reasons unknown, he may WANT to be a no-talent hack.

	Let me offer three names for you to consider: Alan Ginsberg, e. e.
cummings, and James Joyce. How did these three writers become famous?
	They broke the 'rules.' Alan Ginsberg's "Howl" was written with
the intent of breaking established rules about poetry; e. e. cummings
wrote without capitalization (and frequently without any punctuation, as I
recall). And James Joyce? He wrote two books which I am sure most of you
have heard of - or at least one, anyway: _Ulysses_ and _Finnegans Wake_.
_Ulysses_ was banned for obscenity; _Finnegans Wake_ is practically
written in another language.

Yeah, but all of them wrote that way on _purpose_, as a form of art. They
had to know the rules in order to break them in such expressive fashion.
Their 'errors' were purposeful and calculated.

Whereas Thinker's just a idiot with no grammar skills, no originality, no
sense of plot or dialogue, and the emotional maturity of a rabid stoat on
crack.

	And the three of them are famous for it.
	So what's the difference between them and Dr. Thinker? I won't
speculate.

Er. I would certainly hope you can tell the lightyear of difference
between Thinker and Joyce.

My point is that Dr. Thinker doesn't have to write well. We're all telling
him to get a dictionary, a thesaurus, and a grammar handbook - maybe he
has them after all, and writes in his "mangled" style for a *reason*.

And maybe the moon is made of green cheese, and maybe Elvis is alive and
managing a Burger King in Sheboygan. Please.

	He doesn't have to "fix" the way he writes unless he wants to.
	And the rest of us don't have to like it, although we're certainly
welcome to.

No, we don't have to like it. Nor do we have to be silent on this fact.

	Having said this . . . I intend to read Dr. Thinker's next piece
of writing with an open mind, and I encourage the brave among you to do
the same - without flaming his writing afterwards.

I've read his writing. He needs to A) Grow up, B) Practice, and C) Learn
restraint.

	And if you don't like it, you don't have to read anything else he
does write. Just keep an open mind, and remember that there really *are*
no unbreakable rules of writing - except one: to write. It doesn't have to
be good.

True. But the flaming, IMHO wasn't for lousy writing. There are hordes of
lousy writers on the FFML. It was for the sheer gall and rudeness of
'killing' an author without permission in a 'fic'.

				Tim Miller
					trmiller@mail.bcpl.lib.md.us
ENSEN MUYOU!
(No need for Flamewars)