Paul: On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Paul Hill <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Publius Maximus > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I love the idea. Decided to post a blog about it at my new literary >> dumping ground: >> >> http://blog.bobcalco.net > > By the way, I wasn't a huge fan of Stephen Baxter's Ark either.
I gave it the college try. I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, supposing, "he's probably trying to make commentary about all the sex and incest and what-not in the Bible." Folks, especially the atheist SciFi types who haven't a clue what Scripture is revealing through all the gritty stories in the Old Testament use them as a kind of license to exercise their own sexual demons in the name of art or theological criticism or whatever. But seriously -- much of it had less exegetical value than literary value, and the literary value was quite questionable. I'm up for a certain amount of graphical sex and violence if it ultimately makes some kind of intelligible sense in the end. But aside from resurrecting a few long-dead cliches, the sex in this was handled pretty pointlessly. I came away thinking Baxter has some kind of personal issue with pedophilia instead of thinking, "Wow, this totally changed my view of human sexuality!" or "Well that was interesting, even if the core plot did fiz out half way to Earth II." - Publius > > -- > Paul > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
