From: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" <ddanehy@siebel.com>
Subject: (urth) RE: Digest urth.v030.n098
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 09:10:08 

William Ansley wrote:

> I felt I should warn people on this list of a facet of the books
> that was potentially offensive; that was unnecessary. All of the
> people who post messages to this list are obviously too
> sophisticated to be offended by any such thing.

Au contraire: I am in fact too sophisticated _not_ to be offended
by religious bigotry, whether it favors or disfavors mine own 
belief-system. I find, e.g., books like "This Present Darkness" 
quite as intolerable as, I suspect, I should find the Pullmans.


On the other hand, you also wrote (in another message):

> ... I also thought the armored bears ... were very well done.

And I have to admit, I'm curious about any British writer 
cosmpolitan enough to write about the typically American
concern with our right to keep and arm bears. Even the
best British writers tend to be a bit provincial. (Of course,
this is true of American writers, too. And French writers. 
And... Come to think of it, excessive cosmopolitanism is 
almost always a flaw in a writer...)

--Dan'l


*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/