[ilds] Author v. Reader

Alejandro Adams hungerist at hotmail.com
Sun May 4 21:36:20 PDT 2008


I intended to express that I felt INSULTED on behalf of certain lovers of 
Durrell whom I have known and who would never subscribe to a list such as 
this one because they don't feel "qualified" to express themselves on the 
subject.  But to suggest that I'm SPEAKING on their behalf, or on yours? 
That would be rather presumptuous.

I often feel that Bruce is speaking on my behalf (unwittingly of course, as 
we haven't yet formed the Quaint Layman's Brigade), which is a placating 
sensation.  He is quicker and sharper and better-informed than I and manages 
to put his ideas into palatable form.  Thus, I hardly ever feel the urge to 
speak up.  But sometimes the pelting condescension thoroughly erodes my 
respect for decorum at all costs.  If this list is intended to function as 
an exclusive clique, why not screen credentials?

Clearly anyone on this list could wipe the floor with me, but it seems vital 
that we brook dissent, no matter how impuissant the voice or unplain the 


> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 15:04:05 +0100
> From: Ilyas <ilyas.khan at crosby.com>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Author v. Reader
> To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Message-ID: <C44380E5.1013%ilyas.khan at crosby.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Senor Adams
> You may well have some interesting ideas, but you sure as hell can't 
> express
> them in written form. What on earth are you talking about and what are you
> trying to say ? Ever thought of plain English ? I think you dislike
> something that may have been written by "Mr Godshalk", but more than that
> remains a mystery.
> I am a casual reader, and you certainly did not reply "on my behalf".

More information about the ILDS mailing list