anti Rushdie on Pynchon

[Henry Musikar]

Your response: is it sarcastic or dishonest. By criticizing an 
author, you imply a familiarity with that author. Your quibbling with 
"the man's" and asking if  it is a Rushdian constructions suggests 
less than a passing acquaintence with the author, or would you have 
preffered the gender neutral "the person's..." Ahhh, perhaps 
something as "flaccid" as the phrase "the author's..." But then, who 
am I to criticize such deathless incite and prosody as "nothing short 
of stupid." Really!

On 22 Oct 96 at 11:59, MASCARO at humnet.ucla.edu wrote:

> Well, I guess this list is just perfect for such toss-off opinions,
> so here"s mine:  I think J. Rice is off the mark.  I side with the
> anti-Rushdies and think that that Fatwa is responsible for Rushdie's
> notoriety.  His fiction is flaccid, his review of VINELAND was
> nothing short of stupid, and that smug arrogant tone--go away!
> 
> p.s. I am also viscerally reacting against diction like: "great
> examples of the man's prose capabilities"  what's with "the man"? 
> Is that a Rushdian construction?
> 
> john m
> 
> 

Keep Cool, but care. -- TRP
http://www.nicom.com/~gravity