Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lalaith
I was surprised (as I've already mentioned on the Flieger thread - so I also apologise for referring to conversations/links past) how much of this article he'd actually lifted from the original AN Wilson piece in the Telegraph, back in 2001. Wilson did a biography of Lewis and does seem to be a Tolkien fan, albeit a critical one. Here, the expletives are not deleted. Interesting that the Telegraph was less prudish six years ago than the Sunday Times is today. The Wilson piece is much better, but then Wilson, although I often disagree with him, is very smart.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/mai...nw24.xml&page=1 |
Quite. I would suspect that, should that little bit of "journalistic appropriation" be pointed out in arenas that care about such things, Mr. Sunday Times flack might find himself in a bit of a tight spot. But then, I'm not thoroughly familiar with the ethics of Murdoch papers, being more familiar with those of the Lord of Black Harbour--no, um, it's Cross Harbour.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Squatter
This pointless babble from News International I can do without: what isn't obvious or derivative in it is wrong.
|
But very sadly he's achieved what yellow journalism is all about
: he's got highly respected scholars replying to him, attention all over the internet, and fans in an uproar. In the twisted values of rags, he's got his minutes of fame. His article has drawn more readers to the online paper. He's made the advertisers happy. Frankly, he sounds very much like some members of online forums who think that scruffles are what it's all about. And the more we reply to this fellow, the more his puppet masters will crow. Although I commend
Squatter for not naming him. Cleverly done!
Laliath, your link here isn't working for me, to the Wilson piece, although I read it when you linked elsewhere.