Comments on: Book or Movie, Return of The King is a Must See (or Read) http://www.bloggernews.net/12533 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Wed, 15 Feb 2012 04:01:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: KristinBattestella http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-665 KristinBattestella Mon, 04 Dec 2006 03:14:07 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-665 Thanks for reading JT, and coolness a counter point! I don't think it matters, but I attend the Princeton Theological Seminary. Not Oxford, but that's a tad far. I'm not found of Sears, either, but everybody has to start somewhere. Thanks for reading JT, and coolness a counter point!

I don’t think it matters, but I attend the Princeton
Theological Seminary. Not Oxford, but that’s a tad far.

I’m not found of Sears, either, but everybody has to start
somewhere.

]]> By: JTaylor http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-608 JTaylor Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:35:35 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-608 Please allow me to expound. It was not my intent to say that any point made was right or wrong. I was merely trying to draw attention to the fact that a little more (or less, depending) information could be very supportive of the opinions expressed. As we are all well aware, opinions are like certain orifices and while I believe everyone should be allowed to have their own, I also believe that an opinion on a certain subject carries more weight when it is coupled with similar experiences, background, or education. For example, being a classical music and opera enthusiast, I might say, in my opinion, Richard Wagner's work was too dark and foreboding. However, having never studied opera and composition, having never composed or performed an opera, and considering the longevity and popularity of his work, I would never criticize Wagner's ability as a composer or profess that any of his work was poorly done. I do not have that authority. Again, my desire was not to imply a right or wrong judgment. I simply feel (my opinion) that we, as writers and readers, should be more aware of our own limitations, qualifications and abilities and leave the criticizing to the critics because, as much as we might not want to admit it, a far greater number of us are in the same class as Edward George Bulwer-Lytton than are in Tolkien's. Please allow me to expound.
It was not my intent to say that any point made was right or wrong. I was merely trying to draw attention to the fact that a little more (or less, depending) information could be very supportive of the opinions expressed.
As we are all well aware, opinions are like certain orifices and while I believe everyone should be allowed to have their own, I also believe that an opinion on a certain subject carries more weight when it is coupled with similar experiences, background, or education. For example, being a classical music and opera enthusiast, I might say, in my opinion, Richard Wagner’s work was too dark and foreboding. However, having never studied opera and composition, having never composed or performed an opera, and considering the longevity and popularity of his work, I would never criticize Wagner’s ability as a composer or profess that any of his work was poorly done. I do not have that authority.
Again, my desire was not to imply a right or wrong judgment. I simply feel (my opinion) that we, as writers and readers, should be more aware of our own limitations, qualifications and abilities and leave the criticizing to the critics because, as much as we might not want to admit it, a far greater number of us are in the same class as Edward George Bulwer-Lytton than are in Tolkien’s.

]]> By: bnneditor http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-604 bnneditor Thu, 30 Nov 2006 07:29:37 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-604 I fail to see what the author's employment history or musical taste have to do with the validity of her opinion. Her point concerning the weakness of some of Tolkien's prose is a perfectly respectable one. In general, the knowledge that someone has a particular set of credentials or experiences gives us some knowledge about them ahead of time. However, any particular idea or criticism stands on its own merit; professors may spout idiocies and clerks discern profound and fundamental truths. To argue that someone's point is wrong because their status may be low is not rationally defensible. I fail to see what the author’s employment history or musical taste have to do with the validity of her opinion. Her point concerning the weakness of some of Tolkien’s prose is a perfectly respectable one.

In general, the knowledge that someone has a particular set of credentials or experiences gives us some knowledge about them ahead of time. However, any particular idea or criticism stands on its own merit; professors may spout idiocies and clerks discern profound and fundamental truths.

To argue that someone’s point is wrong because their status may be low is not rationally defensible.

]]> By: JTaylor http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-595 JTaylor Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:33:47 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/12533#comment-595 Your praise for "The Return of the King" is obviously well founded based on the success of the trilogy, for the past several decades, as well as the films. However, I find it absolutely absurd that an ex-Sears cashier (with an affinity for the Bee Gees) could have the audacity to criticize the writings of any Oxford professor. While you did state that you are a writer, you failed to note to what extent you have been published as well as your background (I am sure it rivals that of an Oxford professor) education. This type of information could add some validity to your criticism but, being a writer, you should already be aware of this. While you skimped on what you have published and your education, you aptly conveyed the fact that you are more than willing to criticize classic work that you are not willing to pay more than a dollar for. What exactly does that say about you and how seriously should you be taken? Your praise for “The Return of the King” is obviously well founded based on the success of the trilogy, for the past several decades, as well as the films.
However, I find it absolutely absurd that an ex-Sears cashier (with an affinity for the Bee Gees) could have the audacity to criticize the writings of any Oxford professor. While you did state that you are a writer, you failed to note to what extent you have been published as well as your background (I am sure it rivals that of an Oxford professor) education. This type of information could add some validity to your criticism but, being a writer, you should already be aware of this.
While you skimped on what you have published and your education, you aptly conveyed the fact that you are more than willing to criticize classic work that you are not willing to pay more than a dollar for.
What exactly does that say about you and how seriously should you be taken?

]]>