[Galin]

Originally Posted by jallanite

I do not believe that writers should be held to account for every possible interpretation or misinterpretation of their work. I find that idea absurd.

(...) A writer is not to blamed for everything that a reader might infer. People infer racism and sexism in The Lord of the Rings (and their arguments are not entirely without merit). The only real answer is not to write anything. If one finds that female roles are significantly reduced in the Silmarillion, then perhaps one shouldn’t write about it. One should be dishonest and hide the data. One shouldn’t dare say anything that would be controversial to anyone.

Of course you don’t believe that.

Perhaps I am guilty of speaking generally when I'm really thinking about the context of Arda Constructed. That is, I would find it a bit hard to believe that anyone could be unaware that even merely stating that the roles of women have been systematically reduced wasn't probably, and at least 'possibly', going to be taken as suggestive in some negative way.

Doug Kane writes: Well, I for one understand Carl's indignation. I certainly expected that to be the most controversial part of my book, and I'm sure that Carl won't be the only person upset about it.

So no, I don't expect writers to be held to account for every 'possible' interpretation, but again (I would think that), given these fairly specific circumstances, such an interpretation would be expected as probable, and at the least possible -- that is, if one is not careful.

And why is Mr. Kane sure that Carl won't be the only person upset about this criticism? If he is being very careful as you say, and doesn't believe Christopher Tolkien deliberately reduced the role of women, why should he expect anyone to be upset here, or that the criticism should prove to be the most controversial of his book?

“Systematically” does not for me necessarily imply deliberateness. I simply don’t agree with Hofstetter’s nitpicking to such a degree, and there’s an end.

I'm curious then, as to what you think 'systematically' means in the context of Mr. Kane's statement.

(...) Those changes to me really don’t amount to much. It looks to me like an attempt by Hofstetter to save face after his attack crumbled.

What I see is Carl Hostetter taking Mr. Kane's word for it that he didn't intend certain things, despite his presentation.