A Crazy Forum Conversation

I've been a member of an online forum for a few months now and just had a conversation with a scholar in Kosovo about a rare book there. I've never read the novel but still debated the merits with this gentleman. I've taken out his ten page essay, due to copyright infringement. But what follows is priceless.-DavidG


Susan

Extreme Veteran

Posts: 352

Hi there:

There's a book section to discuss books. However, you post is so long that I got lost and confused. Are you trying to promote this book? I'm not really sure what your post is about. 

-----
On the Write Path,
Susan
______________________________________
http://susanlittlefield.blogspot.com/

~Robert~

New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

Hello there,

Thank you for your feedback. Here's my answer to your comment:

1. The point of my posting was to discuss none of the two books (Freedom and The Rose’s Tears.) The former is a famous book, already discussed and commented on for several years now. The second is an unknown one and by an unknown author and I can’t expect writers and editors to discuss about an unknown book, which doesn’t even exist in English. If you read my posting more carefully, you should have noticed that it was addressed to the editors with the hope of helping me with publishing the two posted essays translated from this unknown novel in some literary magazine, because I personally find them very interesting and informative. My first line of the posting says "Dear Editors".

2. As to your comment that the posting is too long, there’s no limit as to the length of the postings. If someone gets bored because of its length, he is free to stop looking at it.

3. If you “got lost and confused” by my posting, as you say, I think it isn’t the text’s length to be blamed for, as long texts aren’t necessarily confusing. On the contrary, my text is quite clear. In it I say, in the clearest way possible, that it is about an author who has spotted certain errors in a distinguished American book that has been awarded the 1991 National Book Award Prize. There’s nothing ambiguous or confusing in all of this, except for someone who deliberately wants to judge it as such. If you wish to take this posting as “promotion”, this is your business. One who is a real lover of literature and culture, would have dwelt a bit longer on the core of the matter: the protagonist of a foreign author’s novel points out certain errors he finds in an American author’s book: Freedom. What is confusing here? The errors appear in the very analysis of the tragedy of which the author of Freedom himself says, "the West has come to view with a reverence close to that reserved for Scriptures...". The question is: is this unknown author right, or he distorts things. And whether he is right or not, let editors, writers or readers jugde it. This is what I expected from you as a writer or editor, if you happen to be one. In a forum of writers, writers are supposed to behave amicably towards another writer, who is a friend, a colleague, even though he might be an unknown or a foreign writer. He is, at least, honest in what he writes. And I think it’s not fair to cast shadows of doubts by feigning to “get lost and confused” in texts that are very clear.

Regards,
Rob

Edited by ~Robert~ 2007-03-10 4:22 PM
Member

Posts: 25

Location: South Jersey Shore

HUH?

~Robert~

New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

Hey Tolaf,

What do you mean by "HUH"? I believe this is a serious forum, of serious members, who must, at least, express their thoughts clearly.

Regards,
Rob

TheRazor
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 360
Location: Connecticut

Quite right my fellow writer. I've been trying to tell these writer's on this site to get serious and stop joking around. Your due diligence in pursuing the pontification of your thesis on the novel, The Rose's Tears is sound, though his views on freedom are black and white and rely on esotericism and give rise to a flat world view.-DavidG (BURRRRRPP)


Edited by TheRazor 2007-03-10 7:03 PM

Susan



Extreme Veteran

Posts: 352

Wow ~Robert~ I guess you told me!! Why such a hostile tone? I could not not tell whether you are for the book or against it, hence the question on promotion. As for clarity of your posting- I asked questions because it is not clear to me. My questions had nothing to do with word count.
Well, goodness, thanks for answering my questions as to what to your content, but there was no call for putting down my character.


-----
On the Write Path,
Susan
______________________________________
http://susanlittlefield.blogspot.com/


~Robert~
New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

Dear David,

Thanks for your reply and for being the only one so far to appreciate my humble efforts! I liked that novel awfully, but I can't burden myself with advocating the author's views on freedom. A hundred people may have a hundred views on a certain topic or notion.

My main point in my posting has been overlooked, i.e. the author's pointing out some inaccuracies on Antingone's analysis in the National Book Award winner, the book Freedom.

Regards,
Rob

TheRazor


Extreme Veteran

Posts: 360

Location: Connecticut

Well, it is noted by many respectable theologists that the contradictions between the Creon and Antigone are well documented by Antigone's motivation by religion and Creon's by the good of the republic. The very contridiction in Antigone's freedom is adherent in the ambigious nature of humanity. For life is unanswerable with no true right or wrong.-DavidG (BUUURRRRPPP)

~Robert~
New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

Dear Susan,

I'm sorry, but again you're misunderstanding me. It's not in my character to be hostile to unknown people, especially to honorable ladies, sincerely speaking.

I'm surprised you don't understand that I am in favor of the novel. This is quite clear. I just got an answer from Mr. David, who had clearly got my point.

I'm sorry to tell you, but in your original post you had only one question, "Are you trying to promote this book?". If you had concrete questions, I would have gladly answered them.

I had no intention to put down your character. This forum is not about discussing people's characters - it's about discussing people's views and ideas.

So, in conclusion, please believe me, there was nothing personal in my previous reply to you.

Regards,

Robert






~Robert~. 


~Robert~
New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

Dear David,

Thanks again for your reply. If we engaged in talking about Antigone, it would take a very long time. What I am discussing here is:

The author of Freedom, in his book, has blundering errors about Antigone's kin relationships. I'm giving you only one instance: Mr. Patterson says that Creon is Oedipus' brother, which, according to all the scholars of the world, is NOT true. This error only, let alone others, creates confusion among readers, students, teachers, etc.

The basic principle of any book must be factual accuracy and truth!

Thanks,
Rob

~Robert~

New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

Dear Susan,

Thanks for your understanding. Have a pleasant evening!

Kind Regards,
Rob


TheRazor

Extreme Veteran

Posts: 360

Location: Connecticut

Quite right, quite right my fellow co-patriot. Creon plays different parts in different plays. In Oedipus the King he embodies reson. In Oedipus at Colonus, he is the epitome of evil. I rolled my eyes when Orlando mistakened Creon for Oedipus brother when everyone knows he is his brother in law. But the slip can be construed to mean that the clear definition of Creon is undefined, like the various roles and his undecisive manner.-DavidG (BBUURRPP~Robert~
New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

David,

I am not a scholar, I'm just a reader. You're right that Creon plays various parts in different plays. But his relation to Oedipus is invariable: he's always and everywhere Oedipus' brother-in-law.

I'm sorry, but I find your effort to defend Patterson to be lame. What we're dealing with here, is a gross mistake, and frankly speaking, I don't see why you're being evasive. I don't think Orlando did it on purpose, as you say, because he has no right to misrepresent characters known all over the world for more than two thousand years, just to prove what point he might wish! As he compares Antigone to the Scriptures, he is bound to be very scrupulous. Hence, I don't think you would pardon Orlando, for example, if he had presented Jesus and Mary Magdalene as brother and sister!

Regards,
Rob

TheRazor


Extreme Veteran

Posts: 360

Location: Connecticut

Though Oedipus married his mother, the relationship is convoluted to begin with. My defense of Patterson is insubstantial since you overlooked my laughter at his omission of the fact. I will give you a free pass this time but other drastic oversites into my hypothesis will have to solved only by a duel. My good man, I do hope as civilized men that we can discuss this oversite like gentlemen, but to be assured that I mean to defend my honor.-DavidG (BBUURRPP)

~Robert~

New User

Posts: 9

Location: Massachusetts

David,

As far as I got you, you admit that Patterson is wrong. If the matter comes to some duel :-), it's true that I'm a fan of The Rose's Tears' author (Stavri Pone), but it would be fair that you challenge him into a duel instead of me, as I myself have some other duels I need to take care of. :-)

Have a nice evening!

Rob



Namik
New User

Posts: 2

Hello folks in the Forum!
I am Namik from Kosovo(it was than part of Jugoslavia), 63 age, and I fled from Albania some 40 years ago across the border among bullets of Enver Hoxha (diktator of the Albania for 50 years) solders, and I was wunded, but thank God I didn’t pass away my soul. I survived, but my family back in the Comunist Albania has undergone terrible ordeals in concentration camps. And I lived for many years underground as Serbains turned back to Albania them who fled to Jugoslavia. I’m a book dealer and I’ve recently red the novel The Rose’s Tear, but not book Freedom.

I followed the exchanges on your forum and I can only say that Mr Robert is write to raise two points from the novel to have them to discusse about. He is right because the novel The Rose’s Tears, among other topics, deals also with a book written by a real American author, not an invented author. Otherwisey, why should Robert have propposed for disscusion in the Forum, issues from a novel that is not in English and is writtein by a foreing author completly unknwon in America, even in Ballkans?

But I’m surprised for the poore level of discussing matters by some persons. And where? In a writers Forum! It’s a shame for a writer like Tolaf to pronounce himself only with an ironical “HUH?”. And he calls himself a writerr! Poor him for the education that he has received and the education he givs others in his books!! As if he is deaf. As if he deosn’t see what the problem is about. And Mr. DavidG is right to cirticize him. Only Mr. David is wrong to defend Pattersons mistakes, which are very clearly pointed out in Viktor’s essays. And he is wrong to present himself as competent on the definition of freedom. As nobody in the world is. Nor Patterson. Nor Pone. God alone is able to definie what freedom is. As He alone has given it us, no matter that we humans grab it form each other! Of all mortal people and scholars only Sigmund Freud was right in defining what freedom is, as he jugded it in the God’s spirit!

The essence of Viktor’s cirticism of Patterson’s view is: Has Man been born free or NOT! God made Man free! And Freud, who is a greater scientist that both Patterson and DavidG, has said: "The liberty of the individul is no gift of civilization. It was greatst before there was any civilization." But those people in the Forum who are biased and not really have democratic spirit wnant to defent their idol, which is Paterson! As if Patterson has got the monopoly of freedom definition! And all others mustt shut their mouths on what freedom is! Lets suppose Patterson is OK, and great, I have nothing with him and with his bookk Freedom, which I have read not, but for this sake that he has won a big Prize, should others people have no right to speak thier thoughts on what freedom is? And except for this, shoud we close our eyes at his mistakes in analysing Antigone tragedy? Viktor says clearly: As Creon and Oedipus are brothers (like Pattreson wrongly says), and as Creon and Antigone are brother and sister (like Patterson wrongly says) then: as Oedipus and Antigone are brother and sister (which is true accodring to Oedipus myth), and Creon and Oedipus are brothers (contrary to the myth), then Creon, Eteocles, Polyneices, Antigone and Ismene = siblings. See what confusion results from Mr. Patterson gross erors! And Mr. DavidG concocts theories that Patterson purposely presented Oedipus and Creon as brothers! What is his point than, to make a mess of the whole tragedy, and Creon to be against burying not only Antigone”s brother, but his own brother too!?

And none member of the Forum wish to ponder and think seriously about such matters. And none is bothered that Patterson is wrong, thogh he has got a big Prize. Let him enjoy it, OK, he might be a great scholar. But it is not honest to mock a guy named Robert, who proposes a serios problem for discussion, that is: weather is Patterson wrong on a specific issue, and not on all over his book! And Roberts gets replying him with an humiliating “HUH?” from Tolaf. Why so, Mr “HUH?” Do you think Mr. Pattreson is God Almighty, and nobdoy has right to criticize something in his book? You only show publicly what a character you have Mr. “HUH!”

The discussion posted by Mr Robert is deep and beyond myself too, even thogh I’ve read hundreds of books. This is a discussion for scholars and learned people, not for a certain Susan, the Extreme Veterane, that gets confused in such prufound matters! She doesn’t understand that the debate on a great book refers to Freedom, not to Pone’s book! Why then dose she poke her nose into discussion if she finds difficult to understand what the matter is about? You’d better deal with pulp fiction and Agatha Christy-like novels, dealr Susan, rather than try to understand things you cant understand!

And please, everybody, be polite and civilized and don’t put down a book of an unkwnon author living somewhere in this world, and dont prejudice his work withou even having a look at it. It is not ethical and humanly. As for the book, I can tell that it can make one’s hairs stay on end! And it has received exraordinary press reveiw in Albania. Look if you wish at his back cover.
Respcet for all,
Namik from Kosovo


TheRazor


Extreme Veteran

Posts: 360

Location: Connecticut

Namik, my friend from Kosovo, I understand your frustration with the lack of good rhetorical responses to Roberts essay. Your trials and tribulations in your opening paragraph deserve respect and admiration but I can’t except your portrayal of me not being competent on delivering the definition of freedom. You say that God is the only one to describe freedom. But God and Philosophy are at odds with each other. This can be seen with Prometheus’ Socrates meets Jesus. http://www.unm.edu/~humanism/socvsjes.htm Yours and Robert’s attack on Patterson’s viewpoint and his right to define freedom, is evidence of freedom. I agreed with Robert that Patterson had made a mistake with naming Creon, Oedipus’ brother not his brother in law but that should not discredit the overall message: That only someone who has lost their freedom, truly knows what freedom is.

You are a man of God and thus believes in the Bible and thus in the story of Adam and Eve. If so than everyone is one’s brother and sister, so lets drop the finger pointing and nit picking over Patterson’s mistake. He was awarded with the Walter Channing Cabot Faculty Prize twice, National Book Award, Sorokin Prize, and Ralph Bunche Award and is a learned man but a man. Like another great philosopher has said, “we’re only human, born to make mistakes.”

Now, to consider Susan to be confused in such a profound situation is both inconsiderate and demeaning. Would a mechanic call you an idiot for not knowing the rear brake ratio? Susan was trying to spark a conversation with a new member of the forum, that’s all. If you want to point a finger, point it here, not at someone on the out-skirts, trying to say hello.

In final thought, Patterson has made mistakes in his justification of his theory on freedom but the mistakes do not derail the message that slaves are the only ones to define freedom. This by definition is a philosophical viewpoint and your defense that God is the only one to define freedom has its own faults in the aforementioned Prometheus work.-DavidG

Susan

Extreme Veteran

Posts: 352

Namik - 2007-03-11 1:20 PM

The discussion posted by Mr Robert is deep and beyond myself too, even thogh I’ve read hundreds of books. This is a discussion for scholars and learned people, not for a certain Susan, the Extreme Veterane, that gets confused in such prufound matters! She doesn’t understand that the debate on a great book refers to Freedom, not to Pone’s book! Why then dose she poke her nose into discussion if she finds difficult to understand what the matter is about? You’d better deal with pulp fiction and Agatha Christy-like novels, dealr Susan, rather than try to understand things you cant understand! And please, everybody, be polite and civilized and don’t put down a book of an unkwnon author living somewhere in this world, and dont prejudice his work withou even having a look at it. It is not ethical and humanly. As for the book, I can tell that it can make one’s hairs stay on end! And it has received exraordinary press reveiw in Albania. Look if you wish at his back cover. Respcet for all, Namik from Kosovo
Excuse me, Namik- might I ask what prompted you to write the above? I did not in any way put down any book, anyone or anything- that is in your perception only. This is a discussion forum where everyone is welcome. We are all allowed to ask questions, especially if we do not understand the subject matter- participation has nothing to do with whether you are a scholar, etc. I don't understand the hostility around this thread.

-----
On the Write Path,
Susan
______________________________________
http://susanlittlefield.blogspot.com/

Namik

New User

Posts: 2

Dear Mr. DavidG,
I’m glad you deigned to give the discussion a seriuos path, and that is great of you. Besides, you were the only one to make that ironical Mr. “HUH?” hush, and least for a while. He has no rights to make a sarcastic question, whitch is obvious even for small kids. Let me begin with your last question – what prompted me to write the messag above. I was prompted because, despite that in his indroduction concerning a novel he has liked very much, Robert stresses his intention clearly, some people claim theu don’t understan him. So I wished to back him. His point is very clear: a foreign novel features these traits: 1) the protagonist’ (who is not an American) parts in company with Patterson (who is an American) as concern his thesis on the origin of freedom; 2) he disagrees with certain Pattersons’s analysises on various topics besides freedom; and 3) he points out certain critically errors in Patterson analysis of Sophocles’ tragedy Antigone. Robert also posted two essays from the novel. But his posting was meeted with queer “hi there” from Susan’s and with her feedback of not understaning his point, and also with another sarcastic and shamefull “HUH?” from another member of the Forum. In addition, I was prompted by your personal efforts to defend Patterson in two points: a) that his definition of freedom is right and unshakable, and b) that his mistakes on Antigone don’t blurr his greatness (which I’ve never implied to be true!).

Now, for the theory on freedom “that slaves are the only ones to define freedom,” even thou it is a “philosopical viewpoint”, I agree with Mr. Pone, the author of the “The Rose’s tears”, that is, I don’t think it to be true. With all the respect of the author of Freedom, a book which I’ll begin to read in Albanian (as it’s been translated some years ago, but I haven’t read it already) based on the essays posted in the Forum, I hold the theory the protagonist of the novel does hold. But I don’t intend to enter here into a discussion on what freedom is. What I want to discuss here is that no one man, even the greatest philosopher, has no right to hold the monopoly of the definiton of Freedom. Of all learned men, I hold only one man that has come very close to the exact (more precis) definition of Freedom, and he is Sigmund Freud, whose definiton I dont’s want to repeat here one more time, as you have it in the posted essays from the novel.

You say, “God and Philosophy are at odds with each other. This can be seen with Prometheus’ Socrates meets Jesus.” All in all I can say that you are quite wrong in opposing philosophy to God. You must first make clear which philosophy you refer to. Is Christian philosopy at odds to God? Is Paulian philosophy at odds to God? Is Saint Augustine philosophy at odds to God? Is Samuel Pudendorf philosophy at odds God? In general, is any theological philosophies at odds to God? If you admit this, it’s your own business, but you are wrong. Besides, even Einstain’s theory is not at odds to God. And many other philosophies. This is only your personal thought. Only the Marxist/Comunist and some other nontheist philosophies are at odds to God. If you happen to be a Comunist or an atheist, I beg your pardon, and I’ll withdraw from the whole discussion with you.

You say, “Susan was trying to spark a conversation with a new member of the forum, that’s all. If you want to point a finger, point it here, not at someone on the out-skirts, trying to say hello.” It is Susan, dear DavidG, who contemptouslly says “Hi there”. To whom refers this lady with her “there?” in the Forum? Is that polite? If you and Susan really want to point a finger to anyone discussing in the Forum, and also on the issues raised in it, they are two: Robert and me, and as to the issues, they invlove the definition of freedom and Antigone’s analysis. If you really wish to discuss, put the finger on those two topics and let’s discuss. But on the condition that none of us dodge these two cardinal points.

I dont’ believe in the Bible, for I’m a muslem. But I’m not ashamed to confess that I’ve read the Bible and any other Christian theologians (as we folks here were Christians some 5 centuries ago) and I persoanlly respect the Bible greatly. Even though It has certain untrue statements, or a least controversial, which the protagonist of the novel The Rose’s Tears puts them very clearly to inmate, who’s a priest, I hold It to be a great book. The protagonist’s questions are very sharp, and even the greatest theologian philosopher cannot answer them. But I don’t intend to go here spinning a yarn about this topic. When I read the novel, I said to myself, “The Bible has miriads of other merits, and despite any shorcomings, they don’t detract from Its magnificence...”

It’s very easy to say “lets drop the finger pointing and nit picking over Patterson’s mistake”. And you begin with giving a list of the Prizes Mr. Patterson has been was awarded with. This is a very infantile defense of you on his behalf. I don”t deny that he has deserved those Prizes. I don’t deny that he must be a great scholar, and a very greatly honored man too. Or, as you put it, simply and rightly, a Man. But with all the Prizes he has won, it doesn’t necessarilly mean that what he says is gold and diamonds, and nothing of his thinking can be put to question. I’d advice you to be more modest about yourself and about Mr. Patterson as well. For, when such a great philosopher like Socrates, some two thousands years ago, has said, “All I know is that I know nothing”, at least you as a person should be more modest. Be so clear-minded, Mr. DavidG, as not to consider neither yourselves infallible, nor anyone else, even though you try to use justifying expressions in an effort to cover up your conceit. As, for example, for mentioning a great philosopher as saying,“we’re only human, born to make mistakes” you either forget, or you make up in not knowing that this great philosoph isn’t the author of this saying. It’s been the Latins some 2000 years ago before him to have put it: “Errare umanum est”. So, don’t try to sell an old silver jar for a brand new one.

As to the mentiong of a “thread of hostility”, it’s not you personally entering it in the discussion, but two other members: Susan and Tolaf. I’m not hostil to any benevolent discussant, neither am I to the ones who are hostil to Robert unduly. Susan drops the hint that Robert is doing some promotion of the novel The Rose’s Tears. No, Robert’s idea is to make it known to those editors and writers, who might be interested in a book in which something interesting has struck him: the protagonists writes e-mails to Patterson discussing his ideas of freedom in it. If none of them is isnterested, that’s OK. But it’s not fair to say that Robert’s introduction is not intelligible. It’s quite clear. And Susan and Tolaf, instead of asking any questions humanely, begin to mock at him. Isn’t this attitute hostile and impolite? What is it that is not understandable in Robert’s introduction? And isn’t the promotion issue Susan asks out of place here? What’s the idea of promoting a novel of an unknown author from a small country! I understand promotion as advertismenent, as efforts to trying for sell something. Robert’s idea may also be to make this novel known to a douzen of Albanian-speaking people in the USA that would be interested, so, if it it is “promotion”, only a douzen copies of this novel (in Albanian) would be sold. See what gains! But his entering in such a Forum it is not promotion. No matter that the novel in itself is a very great work, Robert knows that no American publisher would be interested, even not merely thinking about venturing to publishing it merely for following reasons: a) the author is anknown; b) he is from a small country, nearly unknown to the Americans; c) no appropritate translator could be found to deal with such a huge novel with such a difficult and rich vocabolary, poetic expressions, and deep reflections to render its beauty in another language; c) the huge costs of translating it, and so on. Even the bravest publisher would never dare to undertake that enterprise. So, the promotion issue is out of the question here, but it is just to cast doubts on Robert’s honest intention.

And, finally, don’t make an idol of no one as these could be very with danger to the culture in general, Mr. DavidG, however great he might be. If Patterson is a great scholar, I really congratulate and greet and honor him. But, you, too, at least, not for mercy, but out of humanity, must show respect for an author whom, in spite that you know nothing of him, is at least a weriter, and so allow yourself to suppose that he too toils and racks his brains like you, his colleagues. And it’s not fair to be prejudiced and hostil towards him beforehand, without knowing nothing of him. At least he hasn’t made any gross mistake in his novel. You might suppose the contrary, Ok, it’s your right. But it’s Patterson, no matter how many Prizes has won, has made some mistakes in his Freedom, which he himself compares it to the Bible. Just for this spotting of mistakes alone you should pay honor to Mr. Pone, if you are really unbiased and friendly and objective. And he is not in the least hostil towards Patterson in his book. On the contrary, he is such humane and broad-minded and civilized… He debates with him, yes. But let the public know who is the right. And don’t bring forward Patterson’s titles and Prizes and degrees to show that he, throughout the Freedom, is right. You must rest sure that Mr. Pone never belittles him in his novel. And if you don’t want to understand what Robert’s point is about, its your business. And if you want to defend Patterson with all the ways and means, that is, fanatically, again that is your business, too. But this doesn’t shows that you are right. And I can’t demonstrate, too, that Mr. Pone is right in his theories about freedom. But please, let others think freely of the two viewes. It would have been better to let readers see the two books, but this is an impossible mission, as Mr. Pone’s novel will hardly have a chance to appear in English. But that doesn’t mean that it is not a work worthy to be compared with a book that has win a great Prize, though it has wan no prize, besides the admiration and kindness of those readers who have read it.
REspect for all,
Namik

TheRazor


Extreme Veteran

Posts: 360
Location: Connecticut

My good friend Namik the definition of Philosophy is the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge of ethics and derive from the Greek word Philos, meaning love and Sophia meaning wisdom. I am always in search for the truth in life and have always been of the nature to question everything. With an analytical look at your point that only God can define freedom is unjustified and you have given no evidence to counteract my rebuttal. I did not need to define the specific genre of philosophy to show that the two are at odds, for I pointed you to a particular paper, written by a particular theologian.

Is the conversation we are having here on Patterson’s obvious mistakes or on the definition of Freedom? Because I have already stated many times that I agree that he has blundered. But if it is the latter than we shall discuss. I am neither a Marxist nor a Communist nor do I worship idols and demand that you refrain from suggesting that I hold Patterson as such. And again you misconstrued the premise of showing you Patterson’s awards only to follow it by saying that he has the same faults as us all. I am merely bringing Patterson down to a level of the common man.

Though you don’t believe in the Bible, the Koran has the story of Adam and Eve in it. We are still brothers and sisters no matter if you are a Muslim or Christian. And thus Jesus and Mary Magdalene are brother and sister. You have dodged the question that I have posed.

I am not an expert on religion, philosophy nor Patterson’s work. But I know what freedom is because I am an American. Do not patronize the work that Americans have done throughout the world in fighting and upholding freedom. The blood of my father’s are on the grounds of Europe and the war for Kosovo to free its people.

The irony of this thread is that you are attacking Patterson’s monopoly of the definition of freedom and yet you scour on Susan for speaking. Instead of freedom we should discuss respect. I respect your opinions but your words of: Poor him for the education that he has received and the education he givs others in his books!! As if he is deaf, why then dose she poke her nose into discussion if she finds difficult to understand what the matter is about? You’d better deal with pulp fiction and Agatha Christy-like novels, and dealr Susan, rather than try to understand things you cant understand. Do you not see that these statements are demeaning and hold no value but to ridicule?

I have not read this little known book, The Rose’s Tears but I pose a little known work that you and Robert have not read either, The WD Forum Guidelines.-DavidG

maria

Veteran

Posts: 216

Not that this isn't fascinating but I'd like to put an end to this thread since it's really not the place for it. For general discussion, please post in the Writer's Block Party above and let's try to avoid political rants.
Maria