Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- From: "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 06:05:53 GMT
Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
In article <460DDF28.4090203@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Sea Wasp <seawaspobvious@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It is even so, Dorothy Heydt of Tellus. More, it is a trivial
exercise for even the most moderate intellect to comprehend, should
it be so desired, the revelations experienced by those stalwart
defenders of Civilization, without ourselves being mystified. To
think otherwise would be the same as to insist that no pain or joy
could be understood, save only by experiencing it directly.
I think you, Sea Wasp of Arisia, for your encouraging words.
While my Visualization of the Cosmic All can never rise beyond
the novice level, given the short lifespan within which I must
develop it, I still have attained (to a limited degree) the
ability to see that History as a whole, its end and its beginning
arrayed before me like so many pages upon a scroll that has now
been fully unrolled for my perusal.
Imitating Paarfi is way more fun.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- From: Dorothy J Heydt
- Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- References:
- Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- From: Ken from Chicago
- Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- From: Justin Alexander
- Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- From: Dorothy J Heydt
- Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- From: Sea Wasp
- Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- From: Dorothy J Heydt
- Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- Prev by Date: Re: How would 2007 slang sound to a 1957 or 1937 SF audience?
- Next by Date: Re: How would 2007 slang sound to a 1957 or 1937 SF audience?
- Previous by thread: Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- Next by thread: Re: Should you ever NOT read in publishing order?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
