From: A_Tina_Hall@kruemel.org   
      
    wrote:   
   > A. Tina Hall used his keyboard to write :   
   >> William Vetter   wrote:   
      
   >>> Some time ago, I read one of those books...   
   >>   
   >> Maybe it'd be better you didn't. ;P   
   >>   
   >> You could get so cramped up with the supposed wisdom in those books,   
   >> you could not ever get to write anything.   
   >>   
   > I usually have one around.  I read them while I sit on the crapper.   
   > No worries.   
      
   Hehe.   
      
   I would think some of those books would be better used as low-quality   
   toilet paper (if you only have an outhouse, no water toilet; I wouldn't   
   want the paper to clog the pipe).   
      
   >>> this one was about openings. It's thesis was the belief that it is   
   >>> possible to write an opening so strong, that editors, literary   
   >>> agents, readers, publishing executives are compelled to read on.   
   >>   
   >> Did they provide proof, or was that just their wishful thinking? :)   
      
   > I have read a lot of them, and they blur together.  It may have been   
   > _Hooked_, by Les Eggerton.   
      
   I'm not going anywhere near that. :)   
      
   Thing is, do you blindly swallow what they say, or do you expect them to   
   build up some credibility and expect them to back up what they say?   
      
   >>> One of the examples mentioned the assassination of JFK in the first   
   >>> sentence. Author claimed that this made it so interesting that   
   >>> people MUST read it.   
   >>   
   >> To me that'd signal "oh, real world, not what I want to read".   
      
   > OK, let us say the first sentence mentioned elves.   Why shouldn't   
   > you read LoTR instead?   
      
   I dropped LotR on page 70 (or so), bored. No character in sight that I   
   wanted to read about, and the writing style was awkward.   
      
   I only started _that_ book because someone told me about it and praised   
   it much. I'd read the appendix first, which was interesting.   
      
   If there's elves, I'd still want to know what, why, when, who, before   
   I'm interested. Elves alone would't grab me.   
      
   >>> What I thought was that, "There are a lot of books about JFK.  Why   
   >>> should I read this one?"   
   >>   
   >> That's another reaction that proves the author wrong. Why believe   
   >> anything else they claimed?   
      
   > I've had a different relationship with my teachers than most.  When   
   > you become a world expert in your specialty, then there are very few   
   > people who know much relative to you.  You don't rely on them for   
   > truth, you absorb the technical language they use (which they often   
   > half-understand), then go to the library.  You expect venality, not   
   > truth.   
      
   Eh, no, I expect truth, claimes backed up, and if they are caught at an   
   obvious falsehood, all credibility is gone.   
      
   Plus, you're not a world expert in the speciality of writing. And I   
   doubt the writers of those books are.   
      
   --   
   Food swimming in water just wasn't right.   
             (Senar looking at a bowl of stew.)   -- Magic Earth V   
   Excerpts at:    
      
      
   ---   
   This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus   
   protection is active.   
   http://www.avast.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)