Re: May the shade of Ashton Clark hover over your right shoulder and guard your left.

You identified a problem, the limited availability of the book.  There
is a salve, if not a cure, for this problem, but you did not point to
the salve.  I pointed to it for you (privately and not in the midst of
the whole mailing list you thrust our conversation into) and suggested
that it would further the purposes of your piece to include the links
we discuss now, assuming that your purpose is to inform your audience.

>Again, I really don't understand why our readers can't just go to
>abebooks themselves.

Writing for an audience is an act of hubris; I do it, too.  It is the
author saying "I have something to show you that is worth your time."
So the fact that you have chosen to write about this for an audience
means that you have decided there is a void in your audience's
knowledge of the books of Samuel R. Delany for you to fill.

If your audience is composed of people you assume would benefit from
receiving your wisdom on the books of Samuel R. Delany, then, if you
wish to serve your audience, it is worth considering that there are
other related areas where they may also benefit from receiving your
wisdom, such as where to find the book.

If you do not assume that the audience will benefit from receiving
your wisdom, then for who's benefit do you write?  Is your primary
goal to increase your audience's knowledge of the topic, or to
increase your standing among the audience?  I'm going to give you the
benefit of the doubt and assume that you do believe your audience has
things to learn from you and not just about you.  Given that, I
conclude that a single sentence helping your audience to view the
source material for themselves is worth including, but opinions
clearly can differ, and as the piece is your creation, your opinion
sets the standard, however high or low that may be, for what gets
included.  I originally wrote to you, privately, to highlight an
opportunity to enhance the effectiveness of your piece in informing
your audience, having originally proceeded from the assumption that
informing your audience was your goal.  Now I'm forming a more nuanced
understanding of your motives.

>Oh well, I guess I can move on from cursing the darkness (a really
>interesting turn of phrase, all things considered) to just being
>bitter."

That is a common expression, and I had expected you to recognize it
and deal with it as such.  My bad.  My expectations have been adjusted
accordingly.  If you wish to pull that expression apart in search of
social implications that reflect poorly on me, then make sure that you
amuse and impress yourself since no one else will share.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia-vEoVa6Jh+/J4piUD7e9S/[email protected]>
To: "Norton" <[email protected]>
Cc: <bonobos-4GNy1lrxftmrG/[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: May the shade of Ashton Clark hover over your right
shoulder and guard your left.


On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Norton wrote:

> >> but you might do your
> >> readers more of a service
> >
> >Than drawing their attention to it? To discussing and interesting
> >part of the book?
>
> The point you are missing is that the addition of the link will
result
> in more of a service being done to your reader than is being done
now.

Well, I didn't *quite* miss it, I just don't know how much of an
improvment it is.

It's really a bit of weird rigidity on my part spawned by the way our
CMS
works. When reviewing a book, we can enter an ISBN and have an
automatic
link to Powells under the title. I didn't think of it as a book
reveiw,
and wanted to point to the page I did.

> My statment is not about diminishing what you have already done, it
is
> about an easy way to enhance that.

Yes, I understand. I don't think it's all that much of
enhancement. <shrug/> I feel weird that way.

Again, I really don't understand why our readers can't just go to
abebooks
themselves.

Now if there were an online version of Nova, I'd gladly point to that.

> >Actually, in case you were wondering, I did consider pointing to
> >powells, abebooks, et al, but the nature of used books is to go
> >out of stock, eh? So pointing to possibly transitory links didn't
> >seem quite worth it.
>
> The first link in that set I e-mailed you (
>
http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookSearch?ph=2&an=Samuel+R.+Delany&tn
> =nova ) lists 211 copies of the book you discuss for sale, and it is
> not tied to a particular copy or version of the book, so I don't
think
> it is as transitory as you seem to worry that it is.

Yes, that's absolutely clear. 211 is plenty :)

> Even if it is, the choice is whether to curse the darkness or light
a
> candle.

This is bizarre. I'd do better to post links for all the Delany books
I
cite in the article (I probablly will, when I get around to it). If
your
message was simply, "Hey, Nova's pretty easy to get ahold of, let
folks
know." that's one thing. It *still* doesn't alter my points about the
out-of-printness of it. But to paint me as somehow being a force of
negativity instead of a enhancer of humanity just goes way over into
sheer
rudeness. I mean, talk about bringing out the big guns over
*nothing*. Sheesh.

"There's a typo which, if you don't fix, you shall be a disgracer of
the
name "Delaney" and curse your poor readers to the savage pain of
reading a
misspelling. Shame! Shame!"

"The grammatical infelecity with marred your article was such that if
you
do not change it now, your name will forever more belong to the ranks
of
Bush-inspired faith-based education reformers!"

You would have done *me* much more of a service if you were
encouraging
rather than weirdly obsessed. I flatter myself that finishing the
article
I was working on (about Audre Lorde) would have been a greater service
to
my readers.

But, to get you off my back, I added this:

"(Afterword from Febuary 4th, 2001: there's this guy, "Norton", who
insists that I point to the Abebooks search for Nova, so that I "light
a
candle instead of cursing the darkness" (paraphrase). I thought this
was
so funny and sad that I just had to add it. I don't really see the
large
added value (especially odd is the tension he puts between my "merely
bemoaning" and "lighting a candle" -- is pointed to Abebooks such a
big
deal? does pointing to it somehow redeem my article from nilhilism?).

Oh well, I guess I can move on from cursing the darkness (a really
interesting turn of phrase, all things considered) to just being
bitter."

I *dearly* hope this satisfies you!

Now *please* leave me alone about this.

(Note: I'm not *sure* how torqued off I am about this. I'm
oscillating. So take it all as humorously intended, if a bit edgy.)

Cheers,
Bijan.