<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Some levity for your weekend</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dystel.com/blog/2011/08/some-levity-for-your-weekend/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dystel.com/blog/2011/08/some-levity-for-your-weekend/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:15:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.15</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kristin Laughtin</title>
		<link>http://www.dystel.com/blog/2011/08/some-levity-for-your-weekend/comment-page-1/#comment-24760</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kristin Laughtin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:05:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dystel.com/?p=6482#comment-24760</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am sadly unsurprised by Neo-Nazis loving THE LORD OF THE RINGS, as I&#039;ve read numerous commentaries on the different species representing different races.  It&#039;s an easy thing to read into the book and twist.  Guess they kind of ignore the ending to justify their hate, though.  I can see the reasoning of the pro-life camp with HORTON HEARS A WHO (even though, duh, it was written before Roe v. Wade), but Seuss&#039; response was awesome!  I know I&#039;ve read things into stories that the author didn&#039;t intend, and while it might have made a richer reading experience for me, I&#039;d feel foolish using it to argue any point unless I knew the author intended it.  The killers with THE COLLECTOR got it ass-backwards, though.  And, ohhh LOLITA.  Interesting article!

As for the &quot;books interpreted wrong&quot; article (also fascinating), I feel all proud now that we were taught both interpretations of THE JUNGLE.  My teachers got it right and wrong at once!  We also learned the truth about FAHRENHEIT 451, although I think the book-burning argument is one of those experiences I mentioned above, where it enriches the experience for a lot of us despite being wrong.  I can&#039;t imagine having the audacity to tell the author he didn&#039;t understand his book to his face, though.  Actually, wait.  I&#039;ve seen plenty of people attack authors for &quot;misunderstanding&quot; their own books, but usually those critics had some sort of skewed personal agenda/issue.  Something to look forward to for all of us seeking to be published!  And poor Machiavelli, getting the Jonathan Swift treatment.  By the way, I&#039;m working the library reference desk right now, and the Lewis Carroll entry nearly made me laugh louder than is acceptable.

Anyway, I&#039;ve rambled and only read two of these so far.  Stay safe, all of you!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am sadly unsurprised by Neo-Nazis loving THE LORD OF THE RINGS, as I&#8217;ve read numerous commentaries on the different species representing different races.  It&#8217;s an easy thing to read into the book and twist.  Guess they kind of ignore the ending to justify their hate, though.  I can see the reasoning of the pro-life camp with HORTON HEARS A WHO (even though, duh, it was written before Roe v. Wade), but Seuss&#8217; response was awesome!  I know I&#8217;ve read things into stories that the author didn&#8217;t intend, and while it might have made a richer reading experience for me, I&#8217;d feel foolish using it to argue any point unless I knew the author intended it.  The killers with THE COLLECTOR got it ass-backwards, though.  And, ohhh LOLITA.  Interesting article!</p>
<p>As for the &#8220;books interpreted wrong&#8221; article (also fascinating), I feel all proud now that we were taught both interpretations of THE JUNGLE.  My teachers got it right and wrong at once!  We also learned the truth about FAHRENHEIT 451, although I think the book-burning argument is one of those experiences I mentioned above, where it enriches the experience for a lot of us despite being wrong.  I can&#8217;t imagine having the audacity to tell the author he didn&#8217;t understand his book to his face, though.  Actually, wait.  I&#8217;ve seen plenty of people attack authors for &#8220;misunderstanding&#8221; their own books, but usually those critics had some sort of skewed personal agenda/issue.  Something to look forward to for all of us seeking to be published!  And poor Machiavelli, getting the Jonathan Swift treatment.  By the way, I&#8217;m working the library reference desk right now, and the Lewis Carroll entry nearly made me laugh louder than is acceptable.</p>
<p>Anyway, I&#8217;ve rambled and only read two of these so far.  Stay safe, all of you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
