16-08-2012, 11:42 AM
My point in making public Prior's transparently self-serving, brutally ill-informed correspondence has nothing to do with gratification of my ego.
The piece revealed its author to be an inferior literary packager of previously, eloquently presented ideas -- one so obsessed with self that he would proudly trumpet his own ignorance of the cause he professes to champion.
Prior has the audacity to attempt to indict me for his failings as thinker and essayist. His "Manifesto" on its own merits (actually, lack thereof) has exhibited zero traction here. But as he would have it, that's entirely my fault.
Bullshit!
As writers, we enter our work into the marketplace of ideas, my friends, where they will flourish or perish on their respective merits.
As for making Prior's comments public: It was a tough call for me, but ultimately I made my decision based on the following judgment:
Readers of Prior's "Manifesto" have the right and indeed the need to gain the deepest possible insights into its author's mind, character and agenda. His "private" attack reveals, at least to me, that he thoroughly lacks the courage of his convictions and his craft. Its submission as a private correspondence was a cowardly act committed by a person who postures as a bold seeker of truth and justice. It is comprised in equal parts of arrogance and ignorance.
Did I violate the sanctity of the PM? Arguably, yes.
Do desperate times require desperate measures? Inarguably, yes.
The piece revealed its author to be an inferior literary packager of previously, eloquently presented ideas -- one so obsessed with self that he would proudly trumpet his own ignorance of the cause he professes to champion.
Prior has the audacity to attempt to indict me for his failings as thinker and essayist. His "Manifesto" on its own merits (actually, lack thereof) has exhibited zero traction here. But as he would have it, that's entirely my fault.
Bullshit!
As writers, we enter our work into the marketplace of ideas, my friends, where they will flourish or perish on their respective merits.
As for making Prior's comments public: It was a tough call for me, but ultimately I made my decision based on the following judgment:
Readers of Prior's "Manifesto" have the right and indeed the need to gain the deepest possible insights into its author's mind, character and agenda. His "private" attack reveals, at least to me, that he thoroughly lacks the courage of his convictions and his craft. Its submission as a private correspondence was a cowardly act committed by a person who postures as a bold seeker of truth and justice. It is comprised in equal parts of arrogance and ignorance.
Did I violate the sanctity of the PM? Arguably, yes.
Do desperate times require desperate measures? Inarguably, yes.