If only all writers and those that employ them could look upon their craft in this way. Not for one minute do I want to denigrate RLS but the year is 2000 and 4 and I will pay my own postage thank you very much.

No wonder this forum collects dust ... one must think to enter it ...

I have often wandered in large libraries to bookshleves far from where my usual books of interest are found ... like a different neighborhood of sorts ... foreign and meant for someone else ... but can anyone join in ?

I must admit the last line throws me for some reason ...I'm not quite sure how it fits in to the lines that are before it ??

Anyone care to expand on it ?

Good Day ...

Kid, this is the preface to Travels with a Donkey in the Cevennes,written by Robert Louis Stevenson, a sort of dedication to his friend and editor Sir Sidney Colvin,a literary critic. Hence the proud of friend statement.

"a circular letter to the friends of him who writes it. They alone take his meaning; they find private messages"

A friend being those we connect with, that understand our unique way of communicating, that for one reason or another
share something that makes us comprehensible??

I think this points to the dangers of using quotations out of the original context. As part of a flattering letter it works better than as a maxim for writers. The letter itself contains many of the private (secret) messages Stevenson refers to. If you read the book it is possible that Stevenson is saying that his donkey is his only true friend and that people are unreliable, I hope Colvin got what he really meant!

One of the joys of being a writer is the ability to take another writer's text, to look at it carefully, to analyze it, and to let it stimulate your thoughts and, perhaps, to use it as a jumping board for diving into as yet unexplored realms of fancy.

Thus, further down, another of Stevenson's descriptions, brought back memories from my travels (though by horse, rather than donkey) and inspired me to write a story:

"Still further, and when I was already threading the birches, the crowing of cocks came cheerfully up to my ears, and along with that the voice of a flute discoursing a deliberate and plaintive air from one of the upland villages. I pictured to myself some grizzled, apple-cheeked, country schoolmaster fluting in his bit of a garden in the clear autumn sunshine. All these beautiful and interesting sounds filled my heart with an unwonted expectation; and it appeared to me that, once past this range which I was mounting, I should descend into the garden of the world."
From Robert Louis Stevenson, Travels with a Donkey in the Cevennes.

Of course, rarely will two people read a text in the same way. But that stimulates discussion and made getting a graduate degree in literature both interesting and worthwhile for me. (Literature, in that way, is a lot like religion.)

But I better get back to writing my story . . . . though that is difficult to do, with the garden in full bloom and the woods filled with fresh green.

"Of course, rarely will two people read a text in the same way. But that stimulates discussion and made getting a graduate degree in literature both interesting and worthwhile for me. (Literature, in that way, is a lot like religion.)"
I don't understand this part of your post, are you saying that religious texts are meant to stimulate discussion? Or are you saying that getting a degree in literature was a religious experience because it stimulated discussion? Or something else?

Tony:
This is getting ridiculous. Time for me to drop out.

I don't understand this about you John; you post a quotation to stimulate discussion and having done that you want to drop out when asked to commit. You do this on several forums and it makes no sense. What is your intention with this approach? In my view it is acceptable to make a controversial statement as long as it is backed up with an intelligent view on the ensuing controversy. I am not being ridiculous in asking you to explain a view that, by your own admission, was intended to stimulate thoughts.

That religious experience reference caught my eye as well. I had to read it several times and can only assume that it means that religion is like literature in that it stimulates discussion.

I think John D got upset because you addressed a follow-up post of his rather than the original quote. It seems to be a fault of writers in general (bigot that i am) to be overly defensive of criticism directed at their thoughts. I am amazed at how often writer's boards decay into a writhing mass of accusations, name-calling and such silliness that everyone should be sent to their room hungry.

Back to the quote...

My interpretation would be that he writes for self enjoyment. Characters and plot include vignettes regognizable to friends and thus the book becomes a letter to friends in his circle. Readers outside the circle miss it all, but make it possible financially. Whether one of these peripheral readers makes a connection is neither the point nor the intent.

I think your analysis of the quoted passage is good poppa but the rest is inaccurate. Nothing in what I said was an accusation nor did I call anyone names nor do I think it was silly. John made a statement whose meaning was unclear in an attempt to clarify his point about the original quote but only made it more muddy: I asked for an explanation. This seems like a normal progression in a stimulating discussion to me.

Perhaps that the last line of of paragraph 2 should have been on it's own. It was not meant to imply that your post had sunk to that level, only that writer's threads in general seem to head that way.

The line you wrote about getting a degree being on par to a religious experience may have been a little silly, no? But i like silly, so it may have just struck me that way.

"Normal progression" Now there's something that hardly seems to fit a description of an internet discussion. Road rage is usually more apt in my experience.

Well then, are we not in the best position to change things?

I'll take Much Ado About Nothing for $200, Alex.

I'll take your 200 Alex and raise you another 100 although I think there is way to much nothing and not enough ado.

Writers are such fun to see express themselves! What a kick. Mike

In another Shakespeare play he has someone say that all the world is a stage and we but actors upon it. What part do you play Mike? Or maybe you are have a safe place in the audience.

I don't think what John_D wrote needs any further explaining INKognito.

"rarely will two people read a text in the same way," just as rarely will two people regard and practice a religion (that is based on a text) in a similar manner. There will always be different interpretations on behalf of the readers, and of course, because of that, yes... it will "stimulate discussion."

I believe you caught that point initially, but your second question INKognito: "Or are you saying that getting a degree in literature was a religious experience because it stimulated discussion?" I think is aimed at magnifying a sentence/grammer error.

What is written in the brackets by John_D: "(Literature, in that way, is a lot like religion.)" should have been placed in direct relation to the first sentence in that paragraph: "Of course, rarely will two people read a text in the same way,"

Rather than having been placed as being part of the second sentence of that paragraph: "But that stimulates discussion and made getting a graduate degree in literature both interesting and worthwhile for me. (Literature, in that way, is a lot like religion.)"

Overall, you are just being an editor/bully INKognito and you won't make many friends by behaving as such. This is a discussion forum, and it would get "ridiculous" if everyone began asking one another to clarify each and every grammatical error they've made while speaking or writing. The overall idea was articulated very well in the beginning of John's post (the one that is in question). Perhaps it could be that you took the first paragraph from that post too seriously.

Sorry to disappoint you Video Garden but it was the meaning, not the grammar, that confused me. Surely for a discussion to be meaningful it is important for participants to understand one another.
It could be that John only intended us to think about the quote and not comment but I agree with you that this is a discussion forum. What I have been trying to do is discuss the quote with the understanding that "we don't all read it in the same way." The sentence you refer to is valid in this context; as are any thoughts I might have on the subject.

I too understood the message with out further discussion. Has anyone ever told any of you that you all analyze everything to death? Sometimes discussion can open others up to new ideas, or just show exactly what John D was trying to say. Every one interprets literature differently.

INKognito-- tone is everything and perhaps your tone was misunderstood, or perhaps John D just didn't have the time or energy for the overly analytical discussion. Sometimes a statement is just what it is.

But of course, I am not degreed in anything, or editor or any other such important person. I have written a novel and completed the "story" but not the polishing. I came to this forum for encouragement. I will never post anything of mine. I am neither that brave nor foolish. I need encouragement not to be beaten down. I truly don't understand why there just can't be constructive criticism so that other wantabe's like me can learn something by just lurking, with out all the other nonsense. This has been a very unpleasant and disappointing forum to fall into.

At last the penny has dropped, constructive criticism means encouragement. Someone posts a question or a quote or, god forbid original writing, and unless we have something nice to say we should say nothing.
I went to a different school. A criticism is not a final judgement or de-structive in its intent, it is an honest assessment by the critic who then stands open himself to disagreement. All artists require the criticism of their peers to stay sharp.
If a person like Leslie want to learn from a passive involvement then I suggest books as the best medium, a forum kind of suggests a different form of involvement.
As is evident from the criticism I have received here it seems that I am alone in perceiving a pompous tone in John's original post and subsequent additions. It seems that Leslie only read part of them. Of course literature, like religion, is open to interpretation but wasn't the point of the post to stimulate discussion on those different interpretations?
I am not writing this to stimulate a discussion, after four years I have had a breakthrough and I thank Leslie for that, some differences are just too different. Oh, and thank you for sharing.

INKognito, you are correct, in my opinion (not like that carries much weight or matters, I have no illusions). The mere title of this post/thread suggests a literary discussion. But sometimes some can just beat it to death even after the other party just wants to step out. But truth be told, I tend to agree more with you in the threads I have read than most of the others. So please don't misunderstand my "tone."

When I ask someone to read my work, I don't want only to hear something nice. I want the truth, but is the truth politely too much to ask? I think those that are in a position such as yours can point out something good and expand on it or point out what is wrong with the whole piece and explain politely the error or WHY you feel negative about it. You have the experience and expertise to be an educator, but when the nasty comes out people just shut down and stop listening or get defensive. Just avoid the pampas and nasty-step on it and smear it in the dirt comments. I don't think that you are the worst on this forum about this. I have read several comments that are really rude. I think that also just as there are different interpretations in literature there are also different preferences. Even if you are some great and famous editor just because you don't like a piece doesn't mean that it would not sell a million copies. At the same time just because you do is not always a clue that it will sell a million copies. ("You" not being INKognito per say, but you all, in general, who this shoe fits.) But what do I know?