From: ses3@ellis.uchicago.edu (Steven Schwartz)
Subject: Re: Literary Analysis
Summary: Missing the Point, are we?
Reply-To: ses3@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. Pryce Special Services
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:23:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep22.162439.6959@pimacc.pima.edu> ppugliese@pimacc.pima.edu writes:
>In article <1992Sep22.163719.13105@midway.uchicago.edu>, ses3@ellis.uchicago.edu (Steven Schwartz) writes:
[PHIL on the "violation" of woman riders on fighting dragons on MUSHi]
>> 
>> (1) One (the ban on woman riders) would appear, from the evidence of the
>> books, to have been cultural, not biological.
>
>So what? You still feel that violating a very specific ban confirmed
>by AM herself. You are just using this as an *excuse*, as you say.
>

(1) Your second "sentence" is a fragment.
(2) I am not using anything as an excuse.  If I was running a strict-to-canon
PernMUSH, I would not, except *extremely* rarely, let women impress fighting
dragons.  I'm not.
    This is not a MUSH argument, but a literary one.
(3) Societal matters are generally more subject to change than non-societal 
ones.  It has been established, in canon, that a woman *can* impress a fighting
dragon.  It has not been shown, from canon, that a rider *can* resist the 
mating impulses of his dragon.  This is the difference.

>> (2) When one refers to canon, I think the argument has passed from the
>> realm of MUSH ethics (if indeed it ever inhabited them) into literary
>> criticism....
>
>I think it began as both & still covers both.
>

My statements here are purely in the grounds of literary criticism.  You now
have an explicit statement.  Respond to them as such.

>> (3) The vagueness of the books is not *support* for your argument, but
>> *excuse*.  It permits you to make it.
>
>The vagueness also DOES NOT support the "mandatory, no exceptions" argu-
>ment , either.
>

This is true.  It is not support for either side.  However, that vagueness was 
the *only* thing permitting, let alone supporting, your argument.  There are 
many pieces of evidence arguing against you.

>>    I would, however, point out that the lack of an explicit statement does 
>> not mean that a "most likely by far" judgement cannot be made.
>> 
>
>Which is a subjective call which hardly justifies a narrow stereotypical
>interpretation in any case.
>

Are scientific laws stereotypical?
Because, you now seem to be using stereotypical to describe anything that 
follows a solid, no-exceptions pattern.
   There has never been a mention of a counter-example.
   There have been many cases in verification.
   This means, until you come up with a reason other than "I don't like it", 
the operating theory is that it always happens.
   Thus, as far as canon is concerned, until you can find a reason, that
it always occurs is the practice and theory.
>> 
>>  The attempt is to construct a "most-likely", most-accurate Pern.  There is
>> always room for alternate interpretations, unsupported though they may be.
>>  Just remember, you have given *no* reason, other than "I want it this way",
>> for anyone to take your interpretation seriously.
>> 
>
>Well you've already violated the most-accurate provision already so that
>seems moot.
>

No. Some MUSHes have.  IN constructing a literary canon, which is what *I'm*
interested in, I have not.

>You have given no valid reasons to support your dictatorial , dogmatic inter-
>pretation either. Other than the one you accuse me of, that is.
>

   There are many facts that support it, and none that oppose it.
   That is reason enough.
Do as you will in VR.  However, in terms of the literary analysis of Anne
McCaffrey's works, there is as clear a *fact* of this as you are going to
get without direct statement.

>PHIL

Steven Schwartz, a.k.a. Z'von, bronze Kordath's rider, SouConMUSH


-- 
Steven Schwartz  ses3@midway.uchicago.edu B5 f- w+ g- K+ m  r- p!
UCBU President:  No Power, No Authority, Lots of Scutwork.
"Never say never - especially in 'I'll never sleep with x'.  You're bound
to if you do that, unless, of course, you say it with that in mind." - D.P.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.pern