leapofberen– My comments about "stating things over and over" and about "quasi-gnostic mysticism" refer to
Dakêsîntrah, not to you, in case that was the source of your confusion.
If not, well, I thought I was being straightforward, but here it is another way. You jumped into this thread and started attacking us in what I can only call a pretty darned hostile fashion for arguing with
Dakêsîntrah's interpretation of Tolkien's work, and especially for asking him to provide evidence for his remarkable claims. This is because, for you, this is "intellectualising" and destroys the book's illusion of reality. I mean, what can I say? Yes,
leap we like to discuss books in our book discussion forum. Further, we like to discuss them
as books, that is, as works of fiction. Again, this is a pretty normal thing to do, and I think you were quite out of line getting angry about it.
Quote:
|
And of course you are free to challenge if you wish, I don't think I stated otherwise.
|
Ahem. Maybe I'm totally out,
leap, but it seems to me the entirety of your first post was you expressing your anger and contempt at the analytical, evidence-based style of debating used by myself and others.
By the way, I said you had a double-standard because I see you have yourself argued in this way on another thread. That's a minor point however.