Post originally by Sergio Mascarenhas at 2003-12-29 23:59:26
Converted from Phorums BB System

<< But from what I think I understand. Yes, this interiew is biased by the time that has passed. I freely acknowledge that. >>

This was my first point. And no, you didn't acknowledge that in the review, and you should. I read the review and didn't notice until I looked at the date of publication that it was an old book.

<< However I Believe I am still justified in disagreeing with what seems to be fundamental beliefs stated in this work. >>

You are. But you are not justified in the terms you presented your disagreement. (Notice that I am neither an admirer of Gygax or D&D. I am not being partisan.)

There was a simple fix, though. You could have said 'this book may have been ground-breaking when it was published (I was not there to see it so I cannot judge if this is true or not) but it certainly has little to offer today.'
As simple as this.

<< Besides, with what do we judge great works of literature, but with their timeless quality and the truths they speak to us many generations after their authors have passed? I ask you to consider this. >>

Of course. On the other hand, the book you described (and I didn't read and don't plan to do, in part because of your main comments that are, when deprieved of the side comments, sound) is not literature. It belongs to a genre that tends to become outdated fast.

Sergio