3 May 2009
This story seemed to me a well-covered contrivance. It has the vague [un-convincing] appearance of verisimilitude, but is truly just a front for the author's biased [and bogus] views about both Christianity and Islam. This is a straw dog tale. . .not so much "controversial" as irrelevant, given the extreme complexity of the subjects discussed. In a word, I felt bludgeoned.
6 May 2009
Thank you for posting your opinion of “The Blasphemy,” I am encouraged by your taking the time to do so because I personally find commenting on the internet an unsatisfying and time consuming exercise, only doing so on those rare occasions when what I have read is provocative enough to warrant a response.
I wish you had taken the time to be more specific regarding my “vague (un-convincing) appearance of verisimilitude” and the “biased (and bogus) view(s)” regarding religion you came upon while reading my story. I mention this because without a more detailed critique, you could have expressed the same judgment with a simple “it sucks,” or perhaps the more refined “not my cupa tea.”
It should go without saying that fiction, even the somewhat autobiographical, is invention; unlike essays, the author of imaginary narrative is under no obligation to accurately describe situations, people or events. Notwithstanding this established independence within the literary medium, I do attempt to confine my liberties within verifiable actuality. For this reason I invite you to entertain a friendly interchange of opinion with me on these pages regarding your opinion that my judgment of Christianity and Islam is spurious, or for that matter, any other element within the story that you consider was dealt with in a superfluous and artificial manner.
Again, thank you for your commentary, and I trust you will rapidly recover from that emotional thrashing you received on reading the story.
1 Jun 2009
Read St. Bernard of Clairvaux's "De Laude Militae Novae" or write me for a copy of a paper on that handbook for Christian warriors.