6 ms·

It seems filthy rich of you to claim good faith at this time, but I have recently begun to gather that in some quarters lately, it is considered offensively unr

It seems filthy rich of you to claim good faith at this time, but I have recently begun to gather that in some quarters lately, it is considered offensively unreasonable to expect working knowledge of any material as a prerequisite for participating competently in discussion thereof. So though your claim is facially false, I ironically can't fairly consider that it is other than honestly made. Your precepts are in any case your problem. Good luck with it, you Hacker News expert.

n4r9 2y ago
I'd be happy to receive any pointers on how I'm wrong - perhaps I've misinterpreted what I've read, or there are characters in the rest of his work that defy my stance.
- throwanem 2y ago
  > I'd be happy to receive any pointers on how I'm wrong - perhaps I've misinterpreted what I've read, or there are characters in the rest of his work that defy my stance. If you meant that honestly, you would already have found ample directions for further research, easily enough not to need asking. Everything you claim to want lies just a Google search away, on any of the various and I should hope fairly easily identifiable search terms I have mentioned. "It is not my job to educate you." Or, rather, it would still not be my job even if to learn were what you really want here. You don't, of course. That's why you haven't bothered so much as trying a few searches that might turn up something you would have to pretend to have read. Much easier to try to make me look emotionally unstable - 'defy?' Really. - because you can't actually answer anything I've said and you know it. Good luck with that, too.
  - n4r9 2y ago
    I've read the books, mulled them over, discussed them with others, and done some reading of what other critics have to say online. I've given my opinion and some of the reasoning behind it. If you want more of my reasoning I'm happy to give it. You have given nothing in response. It feels a lot like you've jumped to conclusions because my opinion is very different to yours. So you've immediately decided not to engage but are nevertheless hellbent on making me out to be uninformed or stupid. We've clearly got off on the wrong foot here. I don't want to make out like I think Heinlein is crap. He had a lot of fantastic, creative ideas about science, technology, culture, sexuality and governance. He was extremely daring and sometimes quite subtle in the way he explored those ideas. But - in the novels I've read - his characters lack a certain depth and relatability. They express very little of the self-doubt, empathy, growth, and deep-seated motivations that are core to the human condition. So it goes also with Asimov, Clarke, Bradbury, and others. And it's fine that those weren't their strong suits. They had other strengths. And there were other writers like Bester, Dick, Le Guin, Zelazny, Herbert etc... who could fill the gaps.
    - throwanem 2y ago
      Herbert for better gender and emotional politics than Heinlein. Herbert! And to think I imagined there was nothing left you could say to surprise me. Don't expect me to stop discussing what your behavior displays of your character, just because you've finally shown the modicum of rhetorical sense or tactical cunning required to minimally amend that behavior. Again, if you actually meant even a fraction of what you say, you would now be reading instead of still speaking. If it bothers you that you continue to indict yourself by your actions this way, consider acting differently. Should you at any future point opt to develop a thesis in this area which is capable of supporting knowledgeable discussion, I confide it will find an audience in accord with its quality. In the meantime, please stop inviting me to participate in the project of recovering your totally unforced embarrassment. Believe it or not by the look of things, I already have enough else to do today. Wiping your nose as you struggle and fail to learn from your vastly overprivileged young life's first encounter with entirely merited and obviously unmitigated contempt doesn't really make the list, at least not past the point at which it ceases to amuse, which I admit is now fast approaching.
      - fofff 2y ago
        Fuck off, you condescending prick.
        throwanem 2y ago
        > Fuck off, you condescending prick. Ah, here we go. I understand why you're using a fresh throwaway for this sort of thing, of course. Can't risk being seen for no better than you have to be, eh? But this at least - and, I strongly suspect, at last - is honest. You can't abuse me in any way you're wise or sensible enough to imagine finding, so now you'll go mistreat someone inside the span of your arm's reach, blaming me all the while for your own infantile urge to do so. I wish you every bit as much joy of it as you deserve. And I hope they know your current Hacker News handle.
        fofff 2y ago
        Sitting here rolling my eyes at your response. Seriously, fuck off.

n4r9 2y ago

I'd be happy to receive any pointers on how I'm wrong - perhaps I've misinterpreted what I've read, or there are characters in the rest of his work that defy my stance.

throwanem 2y ago
> I'd be happy to receive any pointers on how I'm wrong - perhaps I've misinterpreted what I've read, or there are characters in the rest of his work that defy my stance. If you meant that honestly, you would already have found ample directions for further research, easily enough not to need asking. Everything you claim to want lies just a Google search away, on any of the various and I should hope fairly easily identifiable search terms I have mentioned. "It is not my job to educate you." Or, rather, it would still not be my job even if to learn were what you really want here. You don't, of course. That's why you haven't bothered so much as trying a few searches that might turn up something you would have to pretend to have read. Much easier to try to make me look emotionally unstable - 'defy?' Really. - because you can't actually answer anything I've said and you know it. Good luck with that, too.
- n4r9 2y ago
  I've read the books, mulled them over, discussed them with others, and done some reading of what other critics have to say online. I've given my opinion and some of the reasoning behind it. If you want more of my reasoning I'm happy to give it. You have given nothing in response. It feels a lot like you've jumped to conclusions because my opinion is very different to yours. So you've immediately decided not to engage but are nevertheless hellbent on making me out to be uninformed or stupid. We've clearly got off on the wrong foot here. I don't want to make out like I think Heinlein is crap. He had a lot of fantastic, creative ideas about science, technology, culture, sexuality and governance. He was extremely daring and sometimes quite subtle in the way he explored those ideas. But - in the novels I've read - his characters lack a certain depth and relatability. They express very little of the self-doubt, empathy, growth, and deep-seated motivations that are core to the human condition. So it goes also with Asimov, Clarke, Bradbury, and others. And it's fine that those weren't their strong suits. They had other strengths. And there were other writers like Bester, Dick, Le Guin, Zelazny, Herbert etc... who could fill the gaps.
  - throwanem 2y ago
    Herbert for better gender and emotional politics than Heinlein. Herbert! And to think I imagined there was nothing left you could say to surprise me. Don't expect me to stop discussing what your behavior displays of your character, just because you've finally shown the modicum of rhetorical sense or tactical cunning required to minimally amend that behavior. Again, if you actually meant even a fraction of what you say, you would now be reading instead of still speaking. If it bothers you that you continue to indict yourself by your actions this way, consider acting differently. Should you at any future point opt to develop a thesis in this area which is capable of supporting knowledgeable discussion, I confide it will find an audience in accord with its quality. In the meantime, please stop inviting me to participate in the project of recovering your totally unforced embarrassment. Believe it or not by the look of things, I already have enough else to do today. Wiping your nose as you struggle and fail to learn from your vastly overprivileged young life's first encounter with entirely merited and obviously unmitigated contempt doesn't really make the list, at least not past the point at which it ceases to amuse, which I admit is now fast approaching.
    - fofff 2y ago
      Fuck off, you condescending prick.
      - throwanem 2y ago
        > Fuck off, you condescending prick. Ah, here we go. I understand why you're using a fresh throwaway for this sort of thing, of course. Can't risk being seen for no better than you have to be, eh? But this at least - and, I strongly suspect, at last - is honest. You can't abuse me in any way you're wise or sensible enough to imagine finding, so now you'll go mistreat someone inside the span of your arm's reach, blaming me all the while for your own infantile urge to do so. I wish you every bit as much joy of it as you deserve. And I hope they know your current Hacker News handle.
        fofff 2y ago
        Sitting here rolling my eyes at your response. Seriously, fuck off.