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.