Yes, there is nothing I can see that isn't part of me. I know condescension
because I have been guilty of it. I know what it feels like. That we are what
we behold is a given. Within that given, however, there are distinctions that
a well-trained literary critic can make. I don't know you at all, but I do know
your writing. Writing, ultimately, does not tell lies. I don't see
condescension when I read William Blake, for instance, even when he criticizes
what he sees as the limited vision of John Locke or Isaac Newton. But I do see
it when I read your writing, less so in Rory, but still there. Now you may not
be aware of any of that, but I am not the only one who sees this condescension
in your writing. With so many people seeing it, may there not be a grain of
truth to it?
jim_flanegin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, excellent point. I've never seen MMY actually communicate with
anyone. Jim and Rory may well be enlightened, but they don't seem to
have enough self-awareness to notice how they come across. Maybe they
just don't give a shit. a
>
How can I *control* your perception of me Angela? Even if I could, I
have no interest in doing so. Why do we all have such different
perceptions of what I say? In the eye of the beholder perhaps?
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
