I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
that they later seem dire. Sometimes it's the result of a changing
personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
can see flaws to which one was blind. Sometimes it comes from changes
in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
can later seem painful.

Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby). Sometimes an
artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.

Joel

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
>
> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?

Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
fade away before a term is invented.

On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
>>
>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>
> Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
> the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
> fade away before a term is invented.
>

The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
it's a "fad". The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be
trapped in a closet. And neither of them were complicit in rape.

Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art. For example
Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
that much because because they come as no surprise. Lovecraft's brand
is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
racism isn't that offputting.

Then you look at Bill Cosby, where his art is about him being cuddly and
nonthreatening and traditional values oriented, it just doesn't come
across so effectively when you know that you're looking at a guy who was
into sticking his dick into drugged unconscious women. Or you read
Marion Zimmer Bradley whose image was "maternal feminist". But now when
you notice that she repeatedly used the idea of some kind of mating
season to undermine sexual volition or that time she wrote about a
boarding school teacher who was sexxoring his students and the problem
with that was not the molestation of boys under his care... Well her
being married to a child molester casts elements of her work into a new
light.

On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
> On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
>>>
>>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
>>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>>
>> Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
>> the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
>> fade away before a term is invented.
>>
>
> The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
> it's a "fad".  The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be
> trapped in a closet.  And neither of them were complicit in rape.
>
> Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
> both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art.  For example
> Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
> that much because because they come as no surprise.  Lovecraft's brand
> is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
> racism isn't that offputting.

Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't
express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical
reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.

The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't
suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.

Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most
people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the
question in my "Wagner and Nazism":

https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On Monday, April 10, 2023 at 6:25:22 AM UTC-4, Gary McGath wrote:
> On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
> > On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
> >> On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
> >>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
> >>
> >> Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
> >> the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
> >> fade away before a term is invented.
> >>
> >
> > The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
> > it's a "fad". The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be
> > trapped in a closet. And neither of them were complicit in rape.
> >
> > Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
> > both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art. For example
> > Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
> > that much because because they come as no surprise. Lovecraft's brand
> > is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
> > racism isn't that offputting.
> Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
> his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
> for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't
> express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical
> reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.
>
> The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't
> suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.
>
> Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most
> people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the
> question in my "Wagner and Nazism":
>
> https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism
>

How many of you, while in the middle of reading a book or sitting in an opera house, stop and think "What do I know about this guy's politics or sex life"? I think it rarely happened in the old days, but now we read or listen on a computer, and it is far too easy to hit pause and go down a rabbit hole that does not involve the work in question, but does get into "what all the cool people are talking about".

I myself find it almost impossible to view a book or movie on a computer rather than in its original form, so I do go to a movie theatre or to see a live play. When there, I do focus on the work and not on the author's backstory.

John

On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 06:25:19 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
wrote:

>On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>> On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
>>>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>>>
>>> Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
>>> the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
>>> fade away before a term is invented.
>>>
>>
>> The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
>> it's a "fad".  The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be
>> trapped in a closet.  And neither of them were complicit in rape.
>>
>> Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
>> both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art.  For example
>> Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
>> that much because because they come as no surprise.  Lovecraft's brand
>> is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
>> racism isn't that offputting.
>
>
>Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
>his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
>for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't
>express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical
>reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.
>
>The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't
>suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.
>
>Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most
>people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the
>question in my "Wagner and Nazism":
>
>https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism

One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on
Shakespeare's plays.

I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was
correct). What a decline!

There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
with anti-Semitism.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

In article <qhc83i9h2rl02c14bir72hq0baq8gld48k@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 06:25:19 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>>> On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
>>>>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>>>>
>>>> Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
>>>> the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
>>>> fade away before a term is invented.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
>>> it's a "fad".� The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be
>>> trapped in a closet.� And neither of them were complicit in rape.
>>>
>>> Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
>>> both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art.� For example
>>> Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
>>> that much because because they come as no surprise.� Lovecraft's brand
>>> is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
>>> racism isn't that offputting.
>>
>>
>>Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
>>his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
>>for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't
>>express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical
>>reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.
>>
>>The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't
>>suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.
>>
>>Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most
>>people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the
>>question in my "Wagner and Nazism":
>>
>>https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism
>
>One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
>good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on
>Shakespeare's plays.
>
>I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
>mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
>when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
>enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
>Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was
>correct). What a decline!
>
>There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
>with anti-Semitism.

"Wagner's music is better than it sounds."
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 4/10/23 12:07 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

> One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
> good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on
> Shakespeare's plays.
>
> I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
> mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
> when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
> enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
> Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was
> correct). What a decline!
>
> There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
> with anti-Semitism.

Someone once said, "Wagner has some great moments, and some boring
quarter hours."

I wonder how many 78s the Ring took and how many bookcases they required.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>
>I wonder how many 78s the Ring took and how many bookcases they required.

The first full recording of the whole Ring was by Moralt in Vienna in 1948,
and it was incredibly artificial sounding. Tiny orchestra in a tiny studio,
but they managed to do the whole thing even if it was a bit rushed.

I have the Siegfried from that set and it's on 38 12" shellac disks. So
if the other three operas are about the same length, you'd expect 152 disks
for the whole set.

Note that they actually cut a lot of stuff out to make it fit onto records,
so to say it's a "full recording" is not QUITE accurate, but it's more complete
than one might like.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article <u1200n$2aupq$1@dont-email.me>,
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>On 4/10/23 12:07 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
>> good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on
>> Shakespeare's plays.
>>
>> I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
>> mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
>> when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
>> enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
>> Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was
>> correct). What a decline!
>>
>> There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
>> with anti-Semitism.
>
>Someone once said, "Wagner has some great moments, and some boring
>quarter hours."
>
>I wonder how many 78s the Ring took and how many bookcases they required.
>

I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s could
get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me given that 10" 78s
could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

Anyway, it would be a lot.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>
>I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s could
>get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me given that 10" 78s
>could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can make the
record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.

The record turns at constant rpm instead of constant linear velocity, so
the running time is linear with diameter and not with area. (With LPs you
run into the additional problem that the linear velocity on the inner tracks
is too low to carry much high frequency information and this is a worry with
78s but not as severe.) So a 12" record only has a bit more time than a 10".
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>> I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
>> could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
>> given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

> It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
> make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.

That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

In article <u12622$in8$1@reader2.panix.com>,
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>> Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>>> I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
>>> could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
>>> given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.
>
>> It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
>> make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.
>
>That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
>78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.

I thought that was just the "Edison" 78s? (Which wouldn't play on Victrolas).
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Monday, April 10, 2023 at 7:28:05 PM UTC-4, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
> Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
> > Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
> >> I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
> >> could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
> >> given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.
>
> > It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
> > make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.
> That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
> 78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.

Both formats were used for 78s, the early Pathe and Edison disks used
vertical.

http://www.vjm.biz/styli-for-playing-78s.html

pt

Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>In article <u12622$in8$1@reader2.panix.com>,
>Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>>> Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>>>> I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
>>>> could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
>>>> given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.
>>
>>> It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
>>> make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.
>>
>>That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
>>78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.
>
>I thought that was just the "Edison" 78s? (Which wouldn't play on Victrolas).

Edison and some Pathe records. But yes, almost all 78s were lateral cut.

Edison was very big on the vertical modulation thing and the cylinder thing
because the tracking was very consistent and the linear velocity was constant.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
> I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
> artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
> that they later seem dire.  Sometimes it's the result of a changing
> personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
> can see flaws to which one was blind.  Sometimes it comes from changes
> in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
> become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
> can later seem painful.
>
> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>  Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
> behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby).  Sometimes an
> artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
> Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
> even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.
>
> Joel
>

A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread
Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
as it might suck too.

--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer (Retired, mostly)

On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcfd36@cruzio.com> wrote:

>On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
>> I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
>> artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
>> that they later seem dire.  Sometimes it's the result of a changing
>> personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
>> can see flaws to which one was blind.  Sometimes it comes from changes
>> in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
>> become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
>> can later seem painful.
>>
>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>>  Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
>> behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby).  Sometimes an
>> artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
>> Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
>> even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.
>>
>> Joel
>>
>
>A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
>suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
>to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread
>Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
>as it might suck too.

Foundation has been good every time I read it. So has Dune.

Thomas Covenant, for me, sucked the first time.

To each his own!
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcfd36@cruzio.com> wrote:

>On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
>> I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
>> artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
>> that they later seem dire.  Sometimes it's the result of a changing
>> personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
>> can see flaws to which one was blind.  Sometimes it comes from changes
>> in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
>> become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
>> can later seem painful.
>>
>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>>  Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
>> behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby).  Sometimes an
>> artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
>> Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
>> even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.
>>
>> Joel
>>
>
>A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
>suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
>to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread
>Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
>as it might suck too.

How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it? As
it did for me.

--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 7:43:16 PM UTC-4, Tim Merrigan wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcf...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> >On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
> >> I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
> >> artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
> >> that they later seem dire. Sometimes it's the result of a changing
> >> personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
> >> can see flaws to which one was blind. Sometimes it comes from changes
> >> in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
> >> become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
> >> can later seem painful.
> >>
> >> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
> >> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
> >> Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
> >> behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby). Sometimes an
> >> artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
> >> Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
> >> even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.
> >>
> >> Joel
> >>
> >
> >A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
> >suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
> >to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread
> >Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
> >as it might suck too.
> How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it? As
> it did for me.
>
> --

I was in a very extended bad mood when I read the first of those.
I was oddly sympathetic to TC's "everything sucks" attitude, though
not to the point of suicidal thoughts. I bought the paperback of
_Lord Foul's Bane_ on a road trip to a fantasy land, Florida, where
my parents were to retire. After about half a year, including a stint
working at a factory where we made orange juice dispensers for
restaurants, I headed back North in time for X-Con 2 in Milwaukee.

I visited zero theme parks while down there.

I read the first trilogy, but no more than that.

--
Kevin R
a.a #2310

On 4/13/23 16:43, Tim Merrigan wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcfd36@cruzio.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
>>> I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
>>> artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
>>> that they later seem dire.  Sometimes it's the result of a changing
>>> personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
>>> can see flaws to which one was blind.  Sometimes it comes from changes
>>> in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
>>> become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
>>> can later seem painful.
>>>
>>> Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
>>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
>>>  Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
>>> behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby).  Sometimes an
>>> artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
>>> Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
>>> even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.
>>>
>>> Joel
>>>
>>
>> A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
>> suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
>> to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread
>> Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
>> as it might suck too.
>
> How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it? As
> it did for me.
>
Not a clue. I read them all in quick succession in my very early 20s or
so. Maybe even earlier. I tried again years later and, well, no. Just no.
--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer (Retired, mostly)

In article <8q4h3il11top98gnkmq52lnfkbikpnnif6@4ax.com>, tppm@ca.rr.com
(Tim Merrigan) wrote:

> How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it?
> As it did for me.

Various college friends were raving over it when I was a freshman. I
started Lord Foul's Bane and gave up maybe 70-80 pages in because it
sucked big-time. That year taught me a lot about reading.

--
John Dallman
"This isn't a supernova problem. It's a pointy-haired boss problem."

In article <memo.20230415212851.3216C@jgd.cix.co.uk>, jgd@cix.co.uk (John
Dallman) wrote:

>
> Various college friends were raving over it when I was a freshman. I
> started Lord Foul's Bane and gave up maybe 70-80 pages in because it
> sucked big-time. That year taught me a lot about reading.

I presume John that you remember the Clench Racing that Nick Lowe used to
do at conventions. Throw copies of the books into the audience, get
people to start reading at random, and the first person to find the word
"clench" wins. Didn't use to take long.

In article <memo.20230416162739.6296C@pauldormer.cix.co.uk>,
prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:

> I presume John that you remember the Clench Racing that Nick Lowe
> used to do at conventions. Throw copies of the books into the
> audience, get people to start reading at random, and the first
> person to find the word "clench" wins. Didn't use to take long.

I do indeed. He, and Joseph Nicholas' reviews in _Paperback Inferno_ were
significant in my developing taste in books.

--
John Dallman
"This isn't a supernova problem. It's a pointy-haired boss problem."