The Shadow Over TLO?

[Joel]

I'd just like to record, having been denied the refuge of irony, that I find being told that those holding non-Christian beliefs will earn the 'judgement' of Christ quite extraordinarily offensive – so much so that I do not wish to continue any activity on this forum. My attempt to make light of what really was a serious provocation was misguided, and Dr Bantham's sensible comments can be taken to conclude debate on these topics. But I want my objection to the use of threats of damnation as a strategy for winning an argument to stand on record. It oversteps the boundaries of reasonable debate and personal argument alike, and casts the historical shadow of the persecution of Jews, heretics and unbelievers. It should not have been tolerated here for a moment.

[Dr. Bantham]

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

I'd just like to record, having been denied the refuge of irony, that I find being told that those holding non-Christian beliefs will earn the 'judgement' of Christ quite extraordinarily offensive – so much so that I do not wish to continue any activity on this forum.

To see the activity of members cease due to sentiments being expressed within the forums or personal arguments that develop thereafter is just what I do not wish to see happen.

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

My attempt to make light of what really was a serious provocation was misguided, and Dr Bantham's sensible comments can be taken to conclude debate on these topics. But I want my objection to the use of threats of damnation as a strategy for winning an argument to stand on record. It oversteps the boundaries of reasonable debate and personal argument alike, and casts the historical shadow of the persecution of Jews, heretics and unbelievers. It should not have been tolerated here for a moment.

Tolerance is a fickle mistress. I have tried to take the neutral path relative to opinion and intervene with commentary when personal animosity reared too far above what I personally consider as civil conduct. To be totally honest, I have refrained from reading much of the content when threads turn nasty. It is not my duty to determine who is at fault in personal arguments. Neither is it my concern to determine who has a belief or opinion which is intolerable. I typically choose to ignore the posts of members who tend to offend me, though it is fair to say that I am not easily offended by the opinion of others. Perhaps this is a measure that others could benefit from. Note that you can actually select an ignore user option from the drop-down list that appears when you click on a member's username from within a thread (wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say no more, say no more). What better way to say "I don't care what you think" than choose to silence someone's voice from your own ears? If members that repeatedly offend others are ignored and receive no replies to their posts, will they not fall silent over time? Some thrive on conflict and die a quiet death without strife to ignite their flames.

[Jeff Coleman]

Quote Originally Posted by Malone

We'd all end up in hell, of course

This quote by Malone pretty much sums up how I feel about all this.

Nicene Creed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nicene_Creed

The creed for millions upon millions of Xtians, century after century. As recited across the vast majority of churches in the world.

A judgement through the returning Christ, not aimed only at unbelievers, but also at the faithful.

I have no doubt that a considerable number of Xtians, such as I, will be called to account for any lack of charity and for those actions causing offence, and I hope Joel might change his view to leave the TLO and reconsider his position.

Mark S.

	TLO THOMAS LIGOTTI ONLINE

[ChildofOldLeech]

Good lord, never had the misfortune to see *that* quote before; always knew Machen subscribed to some ludicrous beliefs (as well as a few sublime ones, natch), and now here he is revealed supporting the mass-murdering tyrant Franco and fascism. Add him to the list containing James, Hodgson, Lovecraft, Robert Howard, Aickman, et al. one could very well make the case that there exist serious links, or at least correlations, between 20th century supernatural fiction and reactionary politics/philosophy.

[RaleC]

Quote Originally Posted by mark_samuels

The creed for millions upon millions of Xtians, century after century. As recited across the vast majority of churches in the world.

You would trust /man/ to act as agent between you and divinity?

You have more faith than I, fella.

[Joel]

Mark S. – implicit offer of truce accepted. Let's move on.

Leach Jr – it's not that simple. You've just listed some writers with very diverse views (and you could have added Poe). One might as well say that science fiction, fantasy or crime fiction is inherently right-wing, based on the views of some of its leading writers – but you'd be ignoring many others who don't fit that mould. And is that always the main issue on the table? Ligotti has identified himself as a socialist, but that doesn't nullify his enthusiasm for Lovecraft or mean that he is a drum-beating 'here comes the revolution' optimist. Philip Larkin is admired by many poets and critics who don't share his politics (which in any case is revealed more in his private correspondence than in his fiction). I've spent enough years involved in both genre writing and political activism to appreciate that, whatever overlaps or correspondences there might be, they are not the same discourse.

Sand's point is also important: people may say many things in their lives, or communicate things without saying them outright, and it's a denial of hermeneutics to latch onto a soundbite as if that were the key to a complex body of work.

[ChildofOldLeech]

Ligotti's a socialist? Rockin'! But seriously, it was late and I was tired, and as I had never come across that quote before (despite might I add, having read over a dozen of Machen's works, and at least three volumes of his autobiography), and was quite surprised by it. However, I should have clarified earlier, that I was not referring to any sort of conspiracy regarding those writers of the genre, but that it would make an interesting point of study, a future monograph to be written on the topic. Hell, I love Monty, Howard and Arthur warts and all - but I still think the case could be made, in an academic sense, and is worth looking into.
And incidentally, if I see right-wing extremists everywhere I look, its because here in the states they're usually there.