Yuku free message boards

Jackula (You see what he's done there? He's made his own name sound like Dracula, just so that you can tell he really is a horror aficionado. Damn that's clever.) said that I am a typical "anti-intelligent fanboy", and judging by the number of people stating that literary criticism is the only way to judge whether a book is good or not, and indeed, from a subsequent post at upfromtheunderground.com, it's clear that my kind of reader is not welcome in some circles of the horror community. Apparently, it's people like me who have prevented horror from achieving the respectability it deserves.

The first part of this is Jason failing to understand a) irony, and b) self-deprecation regarding my choice of member name. Also, nearly anyone here with about five seconds of work can figure/find out who I am if he or she doesn't know already. The second part of this is failure to understand irony and take a joke posted at a satirical website. Hyperbole and reductionism are both common tools used in the construction of satire.

So, to all the publishers like BLP, BMB, CD, Delirium, Donald Grant, Earthling, Necro, NEP, Night Shade, PS and Sub Press who I have spent tens of thousands of dollars with over the past 15 years or so, I apologise for assuming that my money was welcome. If you had only know the kind of mindless reader I am, I'm sure you would have preferred to sell your books to a much more intelligent reader, and probably would have even been prepared to sell them at a loss just for the peace of mind that a more suitable reader was getting them.

To all the authors listed below whose books I have had the audacity to read and enjoy merely as entertainment, again, I apologise. I'm sorry for any embarrassment I may have caused you over the years, where I may have recommended your work as "a good read" or something equally inane. I extend an offer to those of you still around. If you want to buy your books from me, so that you can ensure they get in to the hands of more deserving readers, please feel free to contact me.

Clive Barker, Kealan Patrick Burke, Poppy Z Brite, Ramsey Campbell, Simon Clark, Douglas Clegg, Nancy A Collins, John Connolly, James Ellroy, John Everson, Christopher Fowler, Ray Garton, Steve Gerlach, Greg F Gifune, JF Gonzalez, Ed Gorman, Charles L Grant, James Herbert, Joe Hill, Barry Hoffman, Gerard Houarner, Shaun Hutson, Charlee Jacob, Brian Keene, Jack Ketchum, Caitlin R Kiernan, Stephen King, Brian Knight, Dean Koontz, Joe R Lansdale, Stephen Laws, Richard Laymon, Tim Lebbon, Edward Lee, Patrick Lestewka, Bentley Little, Brian Lumley, Graham Masterton, Brett McBean, Michael McBride, Robert R McCammon, China Mieville, Rex Miller, David Morrell, Mark Morris, James Newman, Kim Newman, Kurt Newton, Monica J O'Rourke, Norman Partridge, Tom Piccirilli, Tim Powers, Jay Russell, David J Schow, Harry Shannon, Dan Simmons, John Skipp, Michael Marshall Smith, Craig Spector, Shane Ryan Staley, Jeff Strand, Peter Straub, Lucy Taylor, Thomas Tessier, Jeffrey Thomas, Wrath James White, Conrad Williams, F Paul Wilson and the many others whose names I'm forgetting.

I don't even know what to make of this. Again, never was the argument put forth that people are wrong for reading for pleasure or escape. No one claimed that anyone had to engage in literary criticism. However the opposite, that horror novels should only be read as escape and that reading for deeper meaning was "elitist," "anal," and a waste of time was made multiple times in the Joshi thread. Also, literary critics were referred to as both parasites and failed writers. So, Jason here is arguing against something that didn't even happen.

Having said that, in the thread on TODP it also states that one of the "skills" of literary criticism is identifying themes in the book of which even the author was unaware. So, perhaps you aren't best placed to assess the suitability of potential readers. To be safe, I think you should check with Jackula. I'm sure he will have a vetting process to check their worthiness.

Again, no such statement was made. What was discussed, rather, was the 60-year-old concept of the intentional fallacy (also discussed on the original thread here). The above quote from Jason shows a willful disregard for the facts and a willful misreading of the posts in question. It's so refreshing to see that ad hominem attacks like this are fine by Matt as long as they don't target anyone he actually likes. I'd rather it continue to stand than get edited, though, just so we all know the levelness of the playing field.

PS. It's obvious why a great author like Richard Laymon had to look abroad to the UK and Australia to establish his career, if narrow-minded people like Jackula are influencing who gets published in the US.