Symbolism

As I said, one doesn't need to be a good person to be a good actor, director or writer. We should be able to separate those things, otherwise we would need to reject so much of art and science even. Forget bands and actors and directors. So many breakthroughs were achieved through horribly unethical experiments. So many famous artists and scientists had very problematic personalities and convictions. Isaac Newton, for example, was apparently a spectacular asshole, yet he still wrote the most important book in science. I can name like 10 other people off the top of my head.
Tarantino is arguably an excellent director and an asshole. That fact shouldn't prevent us from watching a movie he directed, unless he was conveying some problematic messages and values in that same movie.
Fact is, geniuses are very rare, and humanity on average is full of assholes. Logic says many of the geniuses will be assholes. Enjoy the genius but don't forget to point out the asshole part either. Not every genius needs to be idolized.
 
There have been some heated discussions related to the merits of a story having the coveted red H. Some like the visibility it provides readers, while others feel it is redundant and unnecessary since the scores are displayed anyway. I don't believe a consensus has ever been established relative to the influence that the symbol has for readers, but I'll let that slide for now.

What I am curious about here, is what influence any writers have seen that can be attributed to a couple of other symbols, namely the blue W given to monthly and contest winning stories, or the green E given to stories chosen by Laurel as an "Editor's Choice". Can you point to stats or other evidence that prove that these symbols carry any weight with readers?
I thought this was going to be about symbolism…

Bait and switch!
 
Well, it's the "Authors' Hangout," I thought we might be talking about the craft of writing here.
I don't disagree with you and have no idea why you quoted my post on this. Although I just let it ride, it's interesting that so many threads on a writing site skew to the movies (and how chomping at the bit certain posters are to bring politics into the AH).
 
Well, yeah, I did quote this post because he was directly replying to my own, #105 above.

Which I don't know why, because that wasn't about him or by him at all. And the content of his reply doesn't seem to even have anything to do with my #105.

So when he replied to me, and I replied back to him, why did I then get "why'd you quote me bro."

idk, he started it?
 
Back
Top