3 ms·
> 800-page exposition by someone who demonstrates ..., a penchant for rape, ... The relationships between her characters are usually sadomasochistic, not sexua
by wyday 19y ago
> 800-page exposition by someone who demonstrates ..., a penchant for rape, ...
The relationships between her characters are usually sadomasochistic, not sexual abuse. But even when it does appear it takes up barely ten pages in her novels.
> ... and no particular talent as a writer.
Ironically contrary to her message, the popularity of her books suggests otherwise.
- gwenhwyfaer 19y agoYes, but Jeffrey Archer and Jackie Collins are popular.
- wyday 19y agoOK. And because of this Rand isn't?
- gwenhwyfaer 19y agoYou said "popularity => talent" (ie. !popularity \/ talent = T). You also said "Rand has popularity". I presented two cases where I assert popularity /\ !talent = T, ie. !popularity \/ talent = F, to show that !(popularity => talent). Your response: "so you claim that Rand does not have popularity". Er, wtf?
- wyday 19y agoI see. In all your arguments it is talent as judged by you. Therefore you are the arbiter of talent? Can we just end this thread here before we get to the inevitable anticlimactic conclusion that people differ in opinion?
- pg 19y agoI think you're misunderstanding him. He's simply pointing out that you said something false: that popularity is evidence that someone is a good writer.
- wyday 19y agoBut isn't it popularity among the elite (that is, critical popularity) that traditionally decides a writer's talent?
- pg 19y agoAfter a few hundred years.
- randallsquared 19y agoPopularity isn't proof that someone is a good writer, but it certainly is evidence of same.
- pg 19y agoI don't know how far you'd want to rely on that evidence. Only a small percentage of people buy books regularly. So to make a big bestseller you have to write a book that gets bought by that huge majority of people who don't read much. And usually their decisions are dominated by random extraneous factors: i.e. it's a biography of someone they admire, or is related to some doctrine they subscribe to, or contains facts they need or gossip they want to know about. Think of the books you find in the houses of people who have hardly any books: the Bible, the Guinness Book of World Records, a Chilton car repair manual, a racy biography of Princess Di, a book of popular mysticism, a book about how to make money or lose weight. Those are the really big sellers.
- wyday 19y agoIf it's not general popularity, and it's only critical popularity after a few hundred years, then can a writer's talent even be judged in the short term? (This question sounds smarmy, but I ask it earnestly.)
- gwenhwyfaer 19y agoProbably not, no, since one of the tests of quality is timelessness.