Elizabeth,

I received the following e-mail from another e-mailer. I thought you would like to know what other people think of your message to me.

Sunny

Well, Sunny, your response to Elizabeth Elliott was a *model* of restraint!

The Olde Hermit (in such instances) (weary veteran of the newsgroups) has too-much of a tendency (*alas!*) to Reply In Kind! ;)

Feel *free* to forward this *on* to Elizabeth so she gets an idea of how *others* might respond to what she has to say!

*Or* feel free *not* to -- if you think that wisest! ;)

~~friendily

*****************

>You are patronising me as a woman far more that any sexist male could.

*Who* is patronizing *whom*, in the e-mail you have written? You're *projecting* patronizing where none was being done -- to give *you* excuse to be patronizing, yourself.

>I am a woman with a brain, I have a degree in law, a degree in theology and
>a post graduate degree in business management.

Unfortunately the pettiness of this complaint indicates brain-*un*engaged!

>I do not require anyone to
>decide which bits of books I can manage to read without straining my poor
>little intellect to breaking point.

Who is requiring *you* to read that part of the WebSite? What relevance does what *you* require (or do not require) have relative to how someone else sets up *their* WebSite? What *you* require applies only to a WebSite *you* establish.

The "bits of books" chosen always indicate something-of-interest about the selector-thereof. It has *always* been of *great* interest to yours truly to note what a previous reader of a used book has underlined -- for it reveals so *much* about the consciousness of the person who read the book before i acquired it. & sometimes it's someone 50 to a hundred years ago -- with elegantly written notations in the margins! (i've almost *never* run into anyone who's underlined what *i* would, however.) i've also spent long *hours* typing out "the most important parts" of books i've demarcated, myself. i, personally, was *delighted* to see Someone Else doing the same; it was such a Great Service to *introduce* me to other books!

>Please understand I am a grown up and quite capable of reading a whole book.

Why assume *everyone* tuning into this WebSite *is* "grown up" with such a long attention span? Why assume Everyone Else wants to read thru all 150-plus of those books to find a few tidbits?

Do you think this WebSite is *only* for people with 3 degrees? Consider the 16 year old in another country still *struggling* with English as a second language... How *inconsiderate* & *selfish* of you *not* to have considered *their* needs & limitations. It's the World_WIDE_Web, Sister... Every website on it isn't up there *JUST* FOR YOU!

>I do not want bastardised bowdlerised versions of classic works of >literature.

Good! Go out & get the *entire* book! (i *agree* with your sentiments, there. As a teen my mother & i read the complete version of Wilkie Collins's THE MOONSTONE & my younger sister read an abridged version. Everything Mom & i were discussing -- that was of most interest to us -- had been *cut out* of the version Sis had read. i noticed, too, that the Best Parts of Thoreau's WEEK ON THE CONCORD & MERRIMAC -- to *my* then-tastes -- were also cut from the college collection we read.)

>How can chopping a book up possibly assist in making the book >accessible to the reader?

*Easily*! It serves as a kind of quick book review. Much as standing in a bookstore reading a dozen or so paragraphs (or 3 or 4 poems) at random thru a book to see if it grabs you sufficiently to purchase it & read the entirety. *Much* better than a normal type review -- which may reveal little to nothing, in actuality, about the book, & most about the reviewer's prejudices. One can read thru a dozen or two of these things & learn what book or 4 one *truly* might want to read in its/their entirety.

To answer your Question: books you do not *know* exist are *inaccessible* until you *learn* of their existence. Selected extracts from worthy books enable one to learn of their existence.

>All it does is make inaccessible the parts you
>have taken away.

Nonsense. You were given the title of each book & the author(s. It introduces you to books that any *non*-idiot can get thru interlibrary loan (at least in *this* country). With 3 degrees you *surely* know how to do *that*!

>Stop treating me like an idiot and put some complete works on the internet.

You get treated like an idiot when you *carry on* like one! You get patronized when you are patronizing. Sunshine's WebSite is treating *no one* "like an idiot".

Why did you falsely conclude you were being treated "like an idiot"? Do you frequently treat *others* like idiots so much that you falsely-project-in that others are treating you similarly?

Have you been treated "like an idiot" -- in the past -- to the degree that it is a deep (& unhealed) *wound* in you? There has to be a deeper *reason* behind your attitude. *i* don't need to know what it is -- but *you* do. You need to recognize *why* you're writing nhasty stuff like this particular sending.

Do you think all the effort that went into Sunshine's WebSite was all done *only* for *you*? If so, what *arrogance* & (childish?) egotistic inflation! Do you not realize there might be women in India & Afghanistan & Bolivia to whom those short snippets are a God/dess*send -- & mentalities (less advanced than *yours*, doubtlessly! -- but writing *far* more *intelligent* response!) where those snippets are about the right length for each reading session?

>I may have the brain of a weak and feeble woman but, panic not, it’s not
>likely to explode at the prospect of a complete book.

Again, *who's* being patronizing? & *why* are you allowing yourself to describe *yourself* in male sexist imagery like "weak and feeble woman"?

>Yours,
>
>Elizabeth

Responding to you *in kind* as you have dished-out.

But *nice* people get *nice* responses! ;)

~~Winsome/loose-some!

Back to Mail