|
Post by Lily Ariel Linders on Oct 22, 2013 23:25:02 GMT 1
Lily - What I am trying to point out is that you are not responsible for getting anyone to firm up their statements. No one's condemning you for having an opinion or for being curious. And yet I had both Buch and yourself jump down my throat for asking for clarification. And now I am done. I no longer care about any other opinions, because what would be the point when apparently friendly debate turns into accusations and arguments. I am so sick and tired of constantly having varying degrees of my opinions shot down, and my points dismissed, and generally treated like I am in the wrong for trying to have a simple discussion about ... anything. I get that enough at work, I do not need it here where I expect to be able to have friendly chats about common interests among friends. Also, Clint? If I am discussing something with someone who is not you, kindly do me a favor and try not to jump in and jump down my throat when the discussion between me and the person who is not you does not concern you. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Cali on Oct 22, 2013 23:44:25 GMT 1
*jumps and crashes out the window*
|
|
|
Post by Warhammer Gorvar on Oct 22, 2013 23:56:47 GMT 1
Well, there goes Toad's Car again...
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Oct 23, 2013 1:20:47 GMT 1
William Gibson and Frank Herbert are both superior authors to Tolkein or King. I do enjoy Dean Koontz's Moonlight Bay series (Fear Nothing and Seize the Night with a 3rd novel supposedly on the way), it's been a while since I read them, but those books struck me as more cerebral than anything King has attempted aside from Insomnia which was clumsily done. Never read any Gibson. I read a few of Dean Koontz's books in the 90s. He was OK. Nothing special but I found what books of his I read enjoyable once. Twilight Eyes, a book about a young man who was able to see what he called goblins through a mystic disguise they wore while they waged a secret war on humans was actually pretty good. I remember as different one about a genetically engineered super intelligent dog as well. I only read three of Herbert's books. All of them Dune related and only really found Dune ( the first one) worth reading. He jumped the shark really early and milked it for all it was worth. All of the really juicy good environmental, political and religious fodder was used in the first one and it kind of felt like he was beating a dead horse after that. But Dune, was sci-fi at it's very best. He presented a situation and a question and answered it for us. That's what I think is great about sci-fi. The author presenting us with a fictional answer to a question s/he poses us.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Oct 23, 2013 3:17:12 GMT 1
Lily - What I am trying to point out is that you are not responsible for getting anyone to firm up their statements. No one's condemning you for having an opinion or for being curious. And yet I had both Buch and yourself jump down my throat for asking for clarification. I really hate to get involved in this incredibly silly nonsense, but no you bloody well did not. Up until this moment I didn't jump down anything. NO, I did not. You are really misunderstanding me. All I said was that I didn't think the bloody remake of Carrie looked any good. Sorry - I'm legit angry here. NOW. I don't want to damage friendships over a film. Believe it or not I have done that in the past. Once on this board too. So now we have all yelled at one another, we have all misunderstood one another's intentions and we have all made sarky comments about telling everyone else to shut the hell up. Please shut the hell up, it is only a movie and before this I believe we all liked each other pretty much, as people with similar interests, senses of humour and all of that. I for one am sick of arguing with people I like. I said good day sir.
|
|
|
Post by spookyjacobs on Oct 23, 2013 5:31:25 GMT 1
I only read three of Herbert's books. All of them Dune related and only really found Dune ( the first one) worth reading. He jumped the shark really early and milked it for all it was worth. All of the really juicy good environmental, political and religious fodder was used in the first one and it kind of felt like he was beating a dead horse after that. I've read all of his Dune books, and I think they start to get less and less interesting with book 3. But I thought the second one was great. I suppose it is more of the same - political intrigue, bizarre mysticism, sandworms, etc. - so it's probably not a story that needed to be told. But I thought it was really interesting to see the fallout of the events that took place at the end of the first book. So yeah, it didn't really bring anything new to the table, but the more of the same of that calibre of writing and storytelling isn't a bad thing in my book. But it did start to drag for me in the third book when people started turning into sandworms and basically everything after that. Especially when evil dominatrix women show up to take over the galaxy by fucking everyone or whatever the hell was going on in those last two books.
|
|
|
Post by Clint Johnston on Oct 23, 2013 6:03:17 GMT 1
Gorvar - I've nothing against relationships in stories, like what you described, but whilst some sex can be implied, I find the books that make it a critical turning point generally suffer. One counter-example was Brent Weeks' Night Angel series. A crucial plot point involves sex in book 2, and it has echoes throughout the story. It can be done and done well, but most often I personally think it's out of place.
Regarding the "We're done with it". I would like to apologize for the part I played, especially the inclusion of the comic. I stepped over the line, and I'm sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Warhammer Gorvar on Oct 23, 2013 8:36:50 GMT 1
@ Clint Fair enough Sorry about that, was rambling last night. took some dino meds.
|
|
|
Post by Lily Ariel Linders on Oct 23, 2013 10:25:35 GMT 1
And yet I had both Buch and yourself jump down my throat for asking for clarification. I really hate to get involved in this incredibly silly nonsense, but no you bloody well did not. Up until this moment I didn't jump down anything. NO, I did not. You are really misunderstanding me. All I said was that I didn't think the bloody remake of Carrie looked any good. Okay, so maybe the incredibly poor turn of phrase "Lily I don't think I have to justify my opinion to you" when all I did was ask a bloody question for all the gods' sake was not necessarily "jumping down my throat" per se, but it was a major overreaction to my asking a simple bloody question. All you had to say was "I have my reasons and would rather not speak on it" and I would have left it alone. Again, I apologise for asking for goddamn clarification before I knew you apparently don't like being asked for clarification. And now I am bloody well done. As for that post by Clint, with the incredibly condescending and bullying comic making it personal when you had no bloody business butting in to a debate that had absolutely nothing to do with you, that was unnecessary and childish and apology accepted, if you were actually aiming that apology at me. If you were only apologising to Linders, then I have nothing more to say. Again, I am bloody well sick of being made to feel like my opinions and my contributions to conversations are worth bloody nothing. Thanks for making me feel so valued as a forum member with valid opinions here. To take a phrase here, good bloody day sirs.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Oct 23, 2013 10:48:09 GMT 1
I'm putting this thread on a temporary lock. I'll unlock it when I know that we are not going to have a piss off over nothing any more.
I swear to fuck, I will lose my shit if this erupts again elsewhere. We're all adults and none of us needs this.
|
|