Re: Woman Who Plays Chess
- From: "Chess One" <innes8@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:09:53 GMT
"Jim Lawton" <usenet1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:jct9s195fkvs1u8gbh4soh80f2iqcv868g@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> I assumed Phil was a woman all along and have been surprised that
>>> others,
>>> including Kira, have called her a man.
>>
>>you could always come around to my place and we could place a nice game or
>>two Rob, maybe with swords? i am 6' 3" ex-mountain climber [now too old]
>>and
>>apparently only the women here know i am a man :)
>>
>>but i understand you are making nervous joke with another man about being
>>a
>>man - and you guys are okay, neh?
>
> "making _a_ nervous joke" would sound less like PG is writing this, and
> your
> comment is a rather surprising one for a man, in any case.
what particularly interest me Jim is the consciousness of the writer. so i
read here a conversation between two men [probably] speculating on the
gender of someone else, but not being conscious that it is /they/ who
initiate and pursue the subject, with additional open comments like
'surprising'.
if i am a writer, can i write convincing dialog for men and for women? can
you!? maybe answering the second question would inform the first?
if in fact i can write dialog as would seem apt for a woman, then i achieve
something which is notoriously difficult to do.
on a relative scale i like writers who can do this, perhaps byatt who is
female can write convincingly /as a male/, and fowles who is a male can
write convincing female dialog. o'brian is careful of this subject, and
where women appear at all, what is usually emphasised about their appearance
is their impact on men, a very different sort of representation of the
female since it consciously is a male view of them
this is very suprising to me! since a writer of o'brian's calibre could
probably do it, but chooses not to (it think its true that he was the first
translator of the feminist writings of simone de b, right?)
someone not so good at a range of masculine dialog is p.d. james - who can
do it, but all her men are much of a muchness, and dalgleish even though
offered center stage, is not much differentiated from les autres. i wonder
if dalgleish only comes across as an [albeit, fantasy] man to women, but is
not convincing to men?
since these gender topics seem to be of great interest, even 'surprising' to
you, and since you differentiate male/female writing, do you agree that
english usage [and expression overall] is much influenced by gender? this is
of course a central theme to WWPC - much more central than either cultural
orientation, or 'being gifted'
this subject is intended to explore 'talking like a woman', and not as a man
would attempt that - more specifically, that the context of exploring the
life of a woman is as developed by women themselves, which is a highly
unusual proposition for television presentations
cordially, phil innes
> Jim
> --
> a Yorkshire polymoth
.
- References:
- Woman Who Plays Chess
- From: Chess One
- Re: Woman Who Plays Chess
- From: Bill Bonde ('Soli Deo Gloria')
- Re: Woman Who Plays Chess
- From: Robert Bannister
- Re: Woman Who Plays Chess
- From: Chess One
- Re: Woman Who Plays Chess
- From: Jim Lawton
- Woman Who Plays Chess
- Prev by Date: Re: help me understand this, please.
- Next by Date: Re: frequently asked, or frequently-asked?
- Previous by thread: Re: Woman Who Plays Chess
- Next by thread: cool site for scrabble players
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
