Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.RUTGERS.EDU Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!columbia!topaz!Newman.pasa From: Newman.pasa@Xerox.ARPA Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: Re: Dhalgren Message-ID: <3249@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> Date: Mon, 12-Aug-85 12:56:36 EDT Article-I.D.: topaz.3249 Posted: Mon Aug 12 12:56:36 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 14-Aug-85 01:44:18 EDT Sender: daemon@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 31 From: Newman.pasa@Xerox.ARPA Mr Jim, I like to read about people that I can empathize with. I cannot empathize with anyone in Dhalgren. (Perhaps that's my fault ... maybe I am an emotional cripple) Also, I like to read books that seem to have some direction and a plot that I can understand (so I'm a mental midget ... I'm not alone). Perhaps it is great literature. Perhaps it has great redeeming value. All I know is that I was really bored while reading it, and also confused. I was sooo bored and confused that I didn't finish the book - a rare occurrence. I get enough boredom and confusion in my real life that I don't need it from my escapist literature. As I said in my earlier posting, I am primarily trying to erase the notion that everyone thinks that Dhalgren is the greatest thing since sliced bread. If you and everyone you have ever met think that Dhalgren is Delaney's, that is wonderful. However, I have never met anyone personally who liked the book, and I wanted to warn those poor folk who thought to read a wonderful book that won the Nebula award that they might not like it. >>Dave PS I'm sorry if my personal opinions offended you. I'm sorry if you interpreted my note as a peronal flame. I like colorful language and wild expressions; I guess I should include a warning for sensitive folk when I make another outragrous posting.