quote:

Originally posted by IndividualFrog:
The sneakers conversation is totally cooler than the other one in this thread.

I really wish I could find the sneakers I'm thinking of because all the Shibuya boys wear the pointiest, ridiculous shoes, and I've seen Conversey ones a million times. I just don't know any brand names and I don't have access to any Shibuya boys or gyaru-o magazines anymore.

These from Swear are almost as pointy as what I'm thinking of. But they're leather:

There are some really out there sneakers, out there! Japanese and British, notably. I still think the pointy Converse-types look WEIRD! LOL but the pointy Keds are also off-centre...I think they go with the rest of the outfit, though.

*****

Tito is noted by Milgrim as looking "like an ethnic version of a younger Johnny Depp" in Chapter 3. I don't recall any additional references to JD but I will note them if/as I come across them (rereading now). I can't imagine who else would describe him thus. But if Milgrim continues to do so, that totally makes sense to me, as I continue to describe a waiter at a favourite restaurant with a passing resemblance to JD as the "JD Waiter" even though I know his name...

quote:

I even think Inchmale's rationalization of "selling out" at the end is a tacit admission of it on Gibson's part.

Do you really think what he's saying is :
"Hey, guys, I know I sold out. I did it on purpose. I figured I'd let the smartest of my readers figure it out by inserting a clever reference to selling out. Yes, you see, I'm a money-grubbing whore, and not any sort of punk at all."

Don't you think it's more likely to be meant as a commentary about how the current consumer-system tends to buy out all the cool things out there. (in the continuation of one of the Pattern Recognition themes)

quote:

Originally posted by ArkanGL:

quote:

I even think Inchmale's rationalization of "selling out" at the end is a tacit admission of it on Gibson's part.

Do you really think what he's saying is :
"Hey, guys, I know I sold out. I did it on purpose. I figured I'd let the smartest of my readers figure it out by inserting a clever reference to selling out. Yes, you see, I'm a money-grubbing whore, and not any sort of punk at all."

Don't you think it's more likely to be meant as a commentary about how the current consumer-system tends to buy out all the cool things out there. (in the continuation of one of the Pattern Recognition themes)

I think that Gibson would say that he let Inchamale lead him to Inchamle's own decision. He isn't big on analyzing his own text after it's published.

I will say that the prose was likely more accessible to a first time Gibson reader than his previous work, but I don't think he "sold out" in any way. By that logic Thomas Pynchon sold out when he wrote The Crying of Lat 49 after V.

Bill has stated on several occasion that he tries very hard not to be didactic. As such I am failry certain he lets things play out subconsciously and that Inchmale's decision reflects no cnscious intent on the part of the author to communicate a reccurent theme.

Even if said theme soes carry over form his previous books.

quote:

Split is right, either you didn't read the book carefully or you just didn't understand what you read. It is stated clearly and on several occasions that Bigend is:

1)Belgian
2)Not involved with the conspirators
3) Pursuing the box without knowledge of its contents
4) Doing so because he thinks something interesting is going on which he can translate into a marketing campaign

I believe various characters mention those things, but I was reading it too much as a real-world novel and less as a cartoon with a Kingpin-type character who could out-intelligence the US government, or at least rogue Cheney elements of the gov't. I assumed the rockstar reporter was being given a cover story because if she knew the truth, she would tell someone or steal the money or both. I didn't think he was necessarily a true billionaire launching a magazine. It seemed possible it was someone from the intel community pretending to be a billionaire since there was no "word on the street" about any real ad campaign going on for the magazine, despite Bigend's explanation that no advertising is the best advertising or something along those lines.

quote:

All of what you say is completely ridiculous to anyone who has read the text. You do not need to have read pattern recognition to understand the above points clearly.

What you say is true if you take at face value every statement made by every character. Or at least those made by the "good characters". I didn't go into the novel expecting such a clear-cut deliniation of roles.

quote:

You can't win a debate by making things up. Gibson referenced the colors as being the fashion de rigueur for contemporary military/spook wannabes and possibly actual spooks. It goes toward his idea that Surplus Store windows are "hymns to male powerlessness."

It's about phallic substitution and looking cool rather than actually being able to back up your shit. Brown clearly is fuck-up spook, he's kitted out in whatever he thinks might be hip in Soldier of Fortune next to the ads for discount mercs.

I didn't make it up. You elucidated the part I didn't recall quite accurately. The finish and clothes are all about looking-cool. Which might be true, in some cases. But it's hardly flattering to the people who use items with that finish. Not a deal-breaker as far as the narrative, and at first it seemed a logical attitude for the drug addict to have. Once the political opinions of the author become blatantly obvious, it takes on a new context.

Form is actually secondary to function in the use of Parkerizing, and even when SW bucked the trend and started making LadySmiths in pink a few years ago they caught hell from the liberals for that. Little factoid there.

quote:

Again, you have yet to offer any evidence of Gibson explaining the obvious to the reader. Please do so. I contend he does not. Though based on your woeful misreading of actual textual point in the book, perhaps he should.

I did point out the SERE comment, probably Baldwin, and I'd say some of the GPS and Ipod conversations were fluffier than I expected. I get the sense most people here, including you, agree that this book was simplified to a much greater extent that his previous oevre.

quote:

Again, you have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that you know what you're talking about.

I didn't think "novels are not the most current place to get currnet events" needed explanation. As far as Gibson not knowing his stuff, he showed his politics in the novel but no special reason for him to hold those beliefs. And the novel is not "realistic" in the way Sinclair's Jungle, for example, does its muckraking.

quote:

This would be antithetical to McCarthy's nature. If he had one, he wouldn't be McCarthy. I will presume you were joking?

Ha ha. I'd call No Country, as well as ATPH and Blood Meridian "Literature" though, no problem. He's able to switch genres a bit more adroitly than some as well, though I admit that I wasn't impressed as much with his last effort.

quote:

Dude, let me be very clear for you again. It is not about dead celebrities it is about commenting on the nature of our pop obsessed culture. Further, these artists aren't trying to monetize their work so the money comment is irrelevant. The whole business is about reclaiming space and culture form the privately owned world.

It's very clear in the text.

It's right there.

Not trying to be dense, but what do you mean by "reclaiming"? And how does making a holographic projection visible to people wearing special gear "claim" something?

quote:

Well then you would be stupid. The cops are not likely to empty Brown's brain pan if he exposes the nature of the container.

He can sing about the container, which is in another country at the time, or on the high seas. Brown doesn't even know where it is when he's in NY. If he is caught with illegal drugs, a hostage, and a gun, he is going away for a long, long time. Even if he tries to cut a deal, he's drawn unecessary heat for no reason, and violated every rule of tradecraft in the book. And still going away.

You can say it is because he is a total idiot, employed by total idiots, because all neo-cons are total idiots. Everyone who reads Gibson already knows that. Except me, because I missed the last few books, but now I'm catching on.

quote:

I'm not talking about people either of us hangs with; I'm talking about the majority of people in American society who might buy a Gibson book. Most do not know nor care who or what Remington does. I know, but I don't care that he may have erred. It's irrelevant to anyone who isn't anal and already predisposed against the man's work based on his politics.

Yes, I had thought to make the comment about the sort of people who read Gibson books myself, but I dislike being condescending, and, until very recently, I had not realized he had such a niche for an audience.

Besides,I've already told you I was a Gibson fan despite knowing his background before. Even inserting his politics doesn't bother me too much; "American Gods" probably has more leftist ideology than anything Gibson has written but it was still a fine novel. I couldn't call it "literature" but I wouldn't object if someone did.

quote:

Again... sigh... no you haven't. What you have done is point out one fact that may be in dispute which people in general would not know or care about. You again compare this error with the clearly more perceptible errors of making a mistake in a reference to pop-culture which is so named for a reason. I'm sure there a plenty of otaku's who might point out that an author misascribed a quote to Spock actually said by Kirk but most readers wouldn't know the difference and would think anyone who did, and was upset by it so furiously that they needed to post into the ether of cyberspace about it, needed a social life.

I looked up "otaku". You've got over 4000 posts on a website for William Gibson.

quote:

I don't know if you are a neo-con or just an obsessive gun-dork, but Brown isn't a Kamikaze, they entered into their willful destruction of self with meditation and pride. Brown fucking snapped out of frustration and anger. Kidnapping is something that the US seems to be doing on a select basis when terrorists are concerned. Or perhaps you have a different definition of holding people without charge in secret locations where they cannot communicate with the outside world?

Brown, because he was "frustrated", did a Kamikaze on Johnny Depp, who, with the divine guidance of Damballah, was able to leap above the speeding auto and so evade harm. And you were just implying there's no reason to think a Gibson novel is not the best place to learn about contemporary society.

You can say putting individuals in Gitmo is "kidnapping". You can call airstrikes "murder" and waterboarding "torture". Call the US "fascist", call me a neo-con; it's a free country, do as you please.

Just don't call SC "Literature". That's downright offensive.

quote:

I'm suggesting that the locative art is a form of post-modern graffiti.

OK, I can understand the comparison to an extent, despite the need for special VR gear to see locative art while graffitti is blatantly obvious to all. But how does painting something, or making a hologram "claim" anything, other than gangs tagging the extent of their turf? And insofar as gangs do "claim" an area, the tags are not the medium they use to aquire or hold itit, but merely indicators of posession.

quote:

Gibson is more humorous and I think less involved in the actual politics than Clancy. But comparing the two based on that is like your Ford Corvette reference, it has little logic to it. What you seemed to be implying was that Gibson was a hack like Clancy which I see no evidence for.

I didn't see much humor in this book; one mildly amusing joke at Cheney's expense and a play on a Gallic shrug. The rest of the things I laughed at were unintentional.

quote:

Gibson is more humorous and I think less involved in the actual politics than Clancy. But comparing the two based on that is like your Ford Corvette reference, it has little logic to it. What you seemed to be implying was that Gibson was a hack like Clancy which I see no evidence for.

Clancy and SC share the exact same world view that their "side" is correct and their "good guys" are brave and wise and able to see past all the bureacracy and instutional blindness. The "old man" and "Jack Ryan" are "wild cards, who play by their own rules and are willing to go outside the law, but they are the best there is at what they do". The quote is from "Mercenary for Justice", a wretched Steven Seagal movie that, sad to say, shows a bit more nuance than SC. After reading Splitcoil's post here, I'm beginning to think the "old man" is even an avatar for Gibson in the way Ryan is for Clancy and Dirk something is for Clive Cussler.

quote:

If we use Wal Mart as a standard by which to judge literature all is lost.

I used it to judge the relative esoterica index of firearms. It's perfect for that. Any gun or ammo they sell in Wal Mart is utterly plebian.

quote:

I think he definitely reeled in his prose with this one. Possibly after the success of Pattern recognition on the advice of his editor. It was far less baroque and there were less instances of his beautiful wordplay.

We are of one mind on this one. Doing it on the advice of his editor, presumably for the sake of increased sales, comes remarkably close to an accusation of "dumbing it down" and "selling out". You say "Tomatto", I say "tomato".

quote:

I still think it's very well done prose but he did tone it down. The plot though, isn't any more or less, simple than ever. Gibson's whole point is to reveal the folly of paranoia by constructing what appears to be an elaborate plot which is revealed to in fact be a simple occurrence blown out of proportion by apophenia.

I believe he had more twists in other novels, and things were not as much what they appeared to be. Certainly spy thrillers as a genre are not usually so simple. If your interpretation is correct, everyone was exactly what they seemed to be and said they were.

quote:

Tito is noted by Milgrim as looking "like an ethnic version of a younger Johnny Depp" in Chapter 3. I don't recall any additional references to JD but I will note them if/as I come across them (rereading now). I can't imagine who else would describe him thus. But if Milgrim continues to do so, that totally makes sense to me, as I continue to describe a waiter at a favourite restaurant with a passing resemblance to JD as the "JD Waiter" even though I know his name...

Might make sense to describe him as "Johnny Depp", although I don't think Johnny Depp looks all that Chinese. He's described that way more than once; could have been Milgrim's description every time.

quote:

Do you really think what he's saying is :
"Hey, guys, I know I sold out. I did it on purpose. I figured I'd let the smartest of my readers figure it out by inserting a clever reference to selling out. Yes, you see, I'm a money-grubbing whore, and not any sort of punk at all."

Don't you think it's more likely to be meant as a commentary about how the current consumer-system tends to buy out all the cool things out there. (in the continuation of one of the Pattern Recognition themes)

Yes, it seems a very meta-narrative postmodern thing to do as well. Even one of his fans suggested Gibson dumbed it down at his editor's advice, so it doesn't seem too unusual he would admit to it.

I'm not as big on phallic interpretations as some, so despite the somewhat obvious suggestion of "inchmale" as a reference to that, I figured the name at first was a play on "Ishmael". Nothing I saw in the narrative ever supports that further; could be I missed it. But maybe he was saying "I alone remain, but now I sold out", or something along those lines.

He does make a point of castigating Morrison and implies Manzarek/Densmore/Krieger were the real talent or they held Morrison's bombast up or something along those lines. And they were once approached about using a song for Oldsmobile back in the 70's and all had agreed but Morrison, who shot down the idea. They later mocked it by adding Tide's slogan in the end of a song. I imagine that's why they are in there if commercialism is a big theme.

> "American Gods" probably has more leftist ideology than anything Gibson has written but it was still a fine novel. I couldn't call it "literature" but I wouldn't object if someone did.

> Just don't call SC "Literature". That's downright offensive.

I find the above statements fascinating. Could you please tell us what your definition of 'literature' is? I think it could be an interesting read.

quote:

Originally posted by Ruhmkorff:
I'm not as big on phallic interpretations as some, so despite the somewhat obvious suggestion of "inchmale" as a reference to that, I figured the name at first was a play on "Ishmael". Nothing I saw in the narrative ever supports that further; could be I missed it. But maybe he was saying "I alone remain, but now I sold out", or something along those lines.

Errm...how about the next to last page:

"Ollis", Odile was saying, behind her, "you must look at Eenchmale's Willy."

quote:

Originally posted by Ruhmkorff:

I used [Wal-Mart] to judge the relative esoterica index of firearms. It's perfect for that. Any gun or ammo they sell in Wal Mart is utterly plebian.

Not altogether sure that they sell guns and ammo at Canadian Wal-Marts...

quote:

Tito is noted by Milgrim as looking "like an ethnic version of a younger Johnny Depp" in Chapter 3. I don't recall any additional references to JD but I will note them if/as I come across them (rereading now). I can't imagine who else would describe him thus. But if Milgrim continues to do so, that totally makes sense to me, as I continue to describe a waiter at a favourite restaurant with a passing resemblance to JD as the "JD Waiter" even though I know his name...

quote:

Might make sense to describe him as "Johnny Depp", although I don't think Johnny Depp looks all that Chinese. He's described that way more than once; could have been Milgrim's description every time.

I'm up to Chapter 30 (p. 142) and the words "Johnny Depp" have not crossed my eyes since that initial instance. Also, nobody says Johnny Depp looks Chinese. As I noted in the quote above, he is described as an "ethnic version of a younger Johnny Depp." The following sentences read: "Brown had once referred to the IF and his family as Cuban-Chinese, but Milgrim would have been unable to make an ethnic identification. Filipino in a pinch, but that wasn't it either." So you seem to have that in your head as "Chinese Johnny Depp," a description that (again, apparently only in your head) came up again and again. I pick on this one point because it's so simple to refute. Your entire approach to books is odd to me, taking none of the characters or their statements at face value, except, seemingly, Milgrim, the one who's on DRUGS! Your Bigend ideas are particularly amusing to me.

And wow, all you need to be an otaku now is 4K posts on a Gibson message board? LOL! Coll. I wonder what my combined tens of thousands on Radiohead boards make me...A platinum recording artist?

quote:

Originally posted by Fashionpolice:
> "American Gods" probably has more leftist ideology than anything Gibson has written but it was still a fine novel. I couldn't call it "literature" but I wouldn't object if someone did.

> Just don't call SC "Literature". That's downright offensive.

I find the above statements fascinating. Could you please tell us what your definition of 'literature' is? I think it could be an interesting read.

I'm more interested in a definition of 'ideology'.

However Ruhmkorff is right in one thing, Gibson probably wrote the book to annoy him, and to make him react, as can be seen by reading his blog archives from October to December 2004. As for the libertarian tone of Neuromancer, considering that the author had been sixteen years by then in Canada, and like the political system a lot (compared to the USA), that would be confusing anti-reaganism with something else:

quote:

"William Gibson's an MMFA fan. The sound you hear is the sound of 100,000 techno-conservatarian brains exploding..." writes atrios. The puzzling thing about this for me being: Do I have a hundred thousand politically conservative fans, and if so, *can't they read*? Most likely Atrios is referring to that sub-species of tragic mouthbreather so mesmerized by my effortless proliferation of imaginary Starck-slick gizmos that he never even notices the characterization, let alone the socio-political implications. I have always found those guys, like the ones who ask if I've read Ayn Rand, to be a distinct minority.

If I were to put together a truly essential thank-you list for the people who most made it possible for me to write my first six novels, I'd certainly owe as much to Ronald Reagan as to Bill Gates or Lou Reed. Reagan's presidency put the grit in my dystopia. His presidency was the fresh kitty litter I spread for utterly crucial traction on the icey driveway of uncharted futurity. His smile was the nightmare in my back pocket. (William Gibson, 20th October 2004)

Look you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. You admit you imposed your own narrative entirely on the text.There isn't any point in debating further. You read the book you wanted to not the one that was written. Fine, stop bitching about it then.

quote:

I find the above statements fascinating. Could you please tell us what your definition of 'literature' is? I think it could be an interesting read.

The original definition, with context, given by another poster was:

I believe that there is SF which becomes LIT, not merely because of the quality of prose but because of the nature and execution of ideas addressed.

"Cory Doctorow writes SF about IT type things, William Gibson writes LIT about human type things.

One is writing literature, the other is not.

Cory might be clever and well versed in technology but he isn't writing literature.

There is a certain scale of ideas, to my mind, which science fiction rarely seeks to climb.

Good science fiction fufills and perhaps exceeds all necessary requirements of the genre while literature discloses to us ideas about the nature of being."

It is a fair definition, although not exactly mine. Do you feel "American Gods" is emphatically not "Literature"? Or would you insist SC is?

But I would probably agree more strongly with a different poster who wrote "Although there is a difference between bad SF and LIT and between bad LIT and SF, I see no clear difference between SF and LIT."

quote:

Errm...how about the next to last page:

"Ollis", Odile was saying, behind her, "you must look at Eenchmale's Willy."

Sometimes a pun can be funny, but generally I agree with Shakespeare that they are the lowest sort of humor. Not sure why I liked the play on Gallic shrug"; must have been the way he set it up. I would call the reference to a "willy" juvenile, sophomoric humor, except that I usually appreciate immature comments.

quote:

Not altogether sure that they sell guns and ammo at Canadian Wal-Marts...

I think Canadians can have rifles, although handguns are more restricted than in the US. He apparently read about "Silvertips" somewhere, however, and they are, in loaded ammunition, as invariably linked to "Winchester" as "Genuine Draft" is to "Miller" and seeing them called "Remington Silvertips" is as odd as having a character drinking "Coors Genuine Draft" and excusing it by saying the author never uses alcohol.

quote:

I'm up to Chapter 30 (p. 142) and the words "Johnny Depp" have not crossed my eyes since that initial instance. Also, nobody says Johnny Depp looks Chinese. As I noted in the quote above, he is described as an "ethnic version of a younger Johnny Depp." The following sentences read: "Brown had once referred to the IF and his family as Cuban-Chinese, but Milgrim would have been unable to make an ethnic identification. Filipino in a pinch, but that wasn't it either." So you seem to have that in your head as "Chinese Johnny Depp," a description that (again, apparently only in your head) came up again and again. I pick on this one point because it's so simple to refute.

My original quote was just a shorthand description of the character as a "Chinese Johnny Depp". I don't see that as a gross mischaracterization, especially as I wasn't quoting directly from the book, and since I had earlier mentioned he was a multi-culti mixture. Someone then asked why I called him "Johnny Depp" and I said he was described as the movie actor more than once. It is possible he was not described that way more than once before page 142, but if you reach the end without seeing Depp's name again, you will have refuted me.

quote:

Your entire approach to books is odd to me, taking none of the characters or their statements at face value, except, seemingly, Milgrim, the one who's on DRUGS! Your Bigend ideas are particularly amusing to me.

Literature has long exhibited the idea of the unreliable narrator and characters whose words are at odds with their deeds, or who posess ulterior motives; certainly since Chaucer, and even in Norse legends before. It has been especially prevalent in the spy genre, with Le Carre, but also in other genres, such as Nabokov's Kinbote, or Eco's Name of the Rose and Foucault's Pendulum, or more recently, the Life of Pi. But I'm sure Tom Clancy also eschews such (relatively) complex literary devices, however, and he sells tons of books.

I suppose it was my fault for not more swiftly realizing that everything was so simple and easily-understood in SC, and that it was merely a light-hearted liberal Keystone Kops shaggy-dog tale.

quote:

And wow, all you need to be an otaku now is 4K posts on a Gibson message board? LOL! Coll. I wonder what my combined tens of thousands on Radiohead boards make me...A platinum recording artist?

4k posts might not seem like much to someone with tens of thousands. But I did not say having 4k posts made one an otaku.

quote:

I'm more interested in a definition of 'ideology'.

This definition fits here: "In its basic form it is a set of ideas or beliefs which are held to be acceptable by the creators of a media text."

quote:

However Ruhmkorff is right in one thing, Gibson probably wrote the book to annoy him, and to make him react, as can be seen by reading his blog archives from October to December 2004. As for the libertarian tone of Neuromancer, considering that the author had been sixteen years by then in Canada, and like the political system a lot (compared to the USA), that would be confusing anti-reaganism with something else:

By your logic, then, I must have written my posts here to annoy you and make you react?

His ideology was not nearly as strident and obvious in "Neuromancer" as in SC. That's not the only reason, or even the major reason Neuromancer was a better novel, but apparently it was too hard for many people to understand.

quote:

"William Gibson's an MMFA fan. The sound you hear is the sound of 100,000 techno-conservatarian brains exploding..." writes atrios. The puzzling thing about this for me being: Do I have a hundred thousand politically conservative fans, and if so, *can't they read*? Most likely Atrios is referring to that sub-species of tragic mouthbreather so mesmerized by my effortless proliferation of imaginary Starck-slick gizmos that he never even notices the characterization, let alone the socio-political implications. I have always found those guys, like the ones who ask if I've read Ayn Rand, to be a distinct minority.

I'm not much of a techno-anything; not sure what a "conservatarian" is. As I mentioned earlier, I was well-aware Gibson was a draft-dodger long ago, and it's not hard to extrapolate the opinions on any matter political held by members of that particular sub-species of tragic individuals. And one of the unrefuted observations I've made about SC is the fact that it has even less characterization than his other novels. And there's certainly nothing even remotely controversial or cognotively dissonant in "SC". I can safely say I never feared my head might explode, not would there be anything new or surprising in the book to a "neo-con".

quote:

Look you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. You admit you imposed your own narrative entirely on the text

I'm guilty of expecting a more challenging and interesting read, but the end result of this dialectic actually discovered your opinion of the novel with respect to others written by the author is quite similar to my own. We are not so different, you and I.

quote:

You read the book you wanted to not the one that was written. Fine, stop bitching about it then.

No, I read the book he wrote. I got store credit for it when I returned it, so I've no longer any complaints in that deptartment. I've had a fine time exchanging views here and I apologize if any of my comments distressed you.

quote:

Originally posted by Ruhmkorff:
By your logic, then, I must have written my posts here to annoy you and make you react?

What, a shallow negative criticism in an author's own board? One where people like his last book?

And you were annoyed enough to post, after all.

quote:

Originally posted by Fashionpolice:
Leningrad Cowboys sneakers!

Back to the banned 15th Century footwear fashions e.g. Poulaine shoes ?

quote:

I looked up "otaku". You've got over 4000 posts on a website for William Gibson.

Yes, I substituted some grosser addictions.

quote:

Originally posted by Memetic Engineer:

quote:

Originally posted by Fashionpolice:
Leningrad Cowboys sneakers!

Back to the banned 15th Century footwear fashions e.g. Poulaine shoes ?

Thanks for the historical fashion trivia!

quote:

Originally posted by Memetic Engineer:

quote:

Originally posted by Fashionpolice:
Leningrad Cowboys sneakers!

Back to the banned 15th Century footwear fashions e.g. Poulaine shoes ?

I want poulaines with bells on toes so long they bonk my forehead with every step.

The everyone will KNOW how cool I am.

Sumptuary laws saved us from disco happening centuries sooner.

quote:

Originally posted by kenmeer livermaile:

quote:

Originally posted by Memetic Engineer:

quote:

Originally posted by Fashionpolice:
Leningrad Cowboys sneakers!

Back to the banned 15th Century footwear fashions e.g. Poulaine shoes ?

I want poulaines with bells on toes so long they bonk my forehead with every step.

The everyone will KNOW how cool I am.

Sumptuary laws saved us from disco happening centuries sooner.

And you claim fear of the aesthetic police. The 70's didn't have any, look what happened there.

quote:

What, a shallow negative criticism in an author's own board? One where people like his last book?

And you were annoyed enough to post, after all.

Oh, the temerity to suggest a book even his fans admit is dumbed down from his previous novels is not "Literature". I suppose I should have read through all the posts and discovered the dominant consensus on the matter, then posted something that agreed with the groupthink gestalt? I sure hope no heads exploded.

On the other hand, I was never censored in any way despite my criticism, so it doesn't appear anyone is too fearful of dissent.

quote:

Yes, I substituted some grosser addictions.

Not sure there are any. Unless you mean you started reading Rainbow Six? The horror...

Well, I had a nice time here, might be back to visit and learn more about shoes sometime, but thanks for all the replies. Been a pleasure interacting with you all.


"You've read too many books, you've seen too many plays.
And it's things like this that turn you away"