[Nerwen]

blantyr and leapofberen both–

The thing is, that when a person has made definite claims regarding the "true meaning" of a writer's work, I think it quite reasonable that others may wish to challenge those claims, and point out the lack of evidence for them. In this case, the claims are in my opinion far-fetched indeed, and seem to me to have more to do with the poster's own intense preoccupation with some sort of quasi-Gnostic mysticism.

Is Dak free to hold those views? Of course. Are you two free to hold whatever opinions you may hold? Of course. But when a person states a point of view or a belief over and over and over, I consider it a fair assumption that that person does in fact wish to promote it. He should, anyway, be prepared to accept that others may put up counter-arguments. If A is free to state an opinion, B is free to do so also, even if that opinion is in conflict with A's. (To do Dak justice, I don't think– though I may have missed it– that, when things started to go against him, he fell back on claiming that he was just saying what he thought, not trying to push his views on anyone else etc., etc.)

Also– what Pitch said. It's a discussion forum, all right? You two may not approve of the practice of critiquing and analysing books (or films, or paintings) altogether and feel that it's a form of "breaking a thing to find out what it is". Well and good. But you must admit it is a fairly widespread one, yes?