Rene, this seems, shall we say, a bit unlikely in the
circumstances of the discussion transcript, not quite
interview, that I quoted from. You should also not assume
that the fellow conversationalists (or I) manipulated the
materials in question to force a certain unintended
negativity. The quotations are not misleadingly shorn of
context, at least as I presented them.
Dick, while you can't pay back rather than forward, what got
that exchange going was the question posed to the group as a
whole as to whom among CF writers the Nobel might've justly
been given. Not so much as to who influenced whom per se.
Hunter and Leonard made it that, a bit.
TM
-----Original Message----- From: Rene Ribic [mailto:
rribic@optusnet.com.au]
>
> "And finally, should Hunter and Leonard have
lied?"
>
> I think it's a mistake to make too much about these
off-the-cuff
> comments. Both Hunter and Leonard are of a certain
age and of a
> certain status where it becomes rather insulting for
them to be
> asked about writers who have influenced them. Or to
be asked
> about any other writers at all. They've been
churning out the
> books for forty or fifty years. They probably feel
that they
> should be asked about their own novels.
>
> My take is: they did lie. And they're entitled
to.
>
> Dick Lochte
>
Plus we don't know the full context that the comments were
made in. Interviewers are constantly looking for good
soundbites & they will manipulate the situation both
during the interview and later in the editing booth to get
those soundbites. For all we know, the interviewer had goaded
the writers for half an hour before he/she finally got the
soundbite he/she wanted. The interviewer has his or her own
agenda and that should be remembered in these
situations.
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 31 Mar 2003 EST