|
|
Post by HStorm on Aug 25, 2005 17:16:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Oct 2, 2005 13:30:52 GMT
Er...
Well, it's hard to be brutal towards an article that has clearly had much heart and soul put into it, especially as it has been written with quite a bit of pizazz. But...
What a lot of snobby intolerance. I know Detrius makes a disclaimer at the beginning by saying he's not trying to describe all townies, but the way he writes much of what follows, it's hard to see where - or even if - he's drawing the line. His insistence that he's only talking about one particular group of them suggests to me that he should write in far less general terms.
Technically, there are serious faults as well. For all his undoubted talent for colourful writing, I've noticed Detrius displaying a tendency to order words in a way that makes meaning ambiguous, and sometimes to use the wrong word altogether. For instance; -
"I am not prejudiced against all townies, just a small contingent of them."
By using the word 'prejudiced' as the hinge for both clauses, Detrius implies that he's negatively judging a small contingent of townies without actually knowing anything about them. This immediately makes the whole article appear superfluous. I think the term he actually meant was; -
"I am not prejudiced against all townies, but I do have issues with a small contingent of them."
Which at least leaves the rest of the article with some retained value, meaning it might still be worth the bother of reading, even if the reader doesn't really agree with any of it.
The overall purpose of the invective is to be humorous, but sadly it's not so much funny as savage, jeering and genuinely vicious, because even though there's much of its tendency that we can all nod at, it just sounds too superior and down-the-nose for a wider audience to laugh with it; the tone is one of, "aren't these uneducated commoners such inferior barbarians?" which in many cases may even have a nugget of truth hidden away in it, but in the end is over-generalised much, much too far.
In short, it's the sort of of aggressive, sneering, widescale condemnation from on-high that would make most people think, "This writer must be a right nasty little sh*t-bag!" (I'm not saying you are one, by the way, Detrius, merely that that's the impression it might give.)
I'll give it 5 for effort and style, but I can't give any extra for content I'm afraid.
5/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Naselus on Oct 3, 2005 10:59:03 GMT
Elitist nonsense. Makes no real effort to understand it's subject matter, but hides behind the pretense of detailed analysis. I'm not even sure why this is on the site, to be frank; it's sweeping, jeering, and essentially of no value, despite being beautifully presented. A case of presentation over content, which simply doesn't cut the mustard... total opposite of almost every other article on here.
1/10, and that's just for the effort that's clearly gone into it.
|
|
