XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.fan.tolkien, alt.fan.harry-potter   
   From: hayesstw@telkomsa.net   
      
   On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 16:58:40 +0200, Dirk Thierbach   
    wrote:   
      
   >Steve Hayes  wrote:   
   >>>So far, all you have done is insisted that this must be an allegory,   
   >>>without even trying to explain it. Sorry, I'm not just going to take   
   >>>your word for it.   
   >   
   >> Well you don't have to. You can think that Lockhard was an allegorical   
   >> representation of Pullman if you like   
   >   
   >Just for the record: I *don't* think that Lockhard is an allegorical   
   >representation of Pullman. As I've said multiple times.   
   >   
   >But *you* said that if Lockhard would represent Pullman, then that   
   >would be an allegory. Which started this whole discussion.   
      
   No, what started the whole discussion was that you said someone saw Lockhart   
   as representing Pullman, and I said that if he did (which he doesn't, that   
   would be an allegory).   
      
      
   --   
   Steve Hayes   
   Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm   
        http://www.goodreads.com/hayesstw   
        http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)