Page 1 of 1

Accountability?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 18:03
by Shepherd492
Has Kevin ever tried to defend making Frank's works in universe texts? Maybe I just missed it, and it doesn't matter at any rate (I kind of know the answer he would give) but I am curious.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 18:34
by JustSomeGuy
He made such a fucking mess of McDune that he felt it necessary to make Frank Herbert's Dune series in-universe texts, in order to silence the "talifan."

That's just what I think. Maybe he had a good reason. If so, then I, too, would like to hear it.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 21:44
by Ampoliros
You only defend something if you feel it was a mistake. KJA thinks Dune is his now, more than it was ever Frank's.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 22:02
by A Thing of Eternity
He hasn't brought it up to my knowledge, and if he's smart, he won't. Here's why - I'm pretty sure when KJA put out that the original books were "in-universe" he did it through the words/thoughts of a character, not through the narrator (I haven't read the book in question other than relevant quotes). As such, if he was smart (he isn't though...) he could actually claim that that very statement was itself a biased in-universe opinion of a character.

So he could get out of it if he wanted to and was smart enough. I don't give him that much credit though, I doubt he realizes the loophole he left himself, and I do believe he did fully intend for that message to be taken literally by the readers, to cover his ass for the countless mistakes of the new books.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 22:30
by Shepherd492
A Thing of Eternity wrote:He hasn't brought it up to my knowledge, and if he's smart, he won't. Here's why - I'm pretty sure when KJA put out that the original books were "in-universe" he did it through the words/thoughts of a character, not through the narrator (I haven't read the book in question other than relevant quotes). As such, if he was smart (he isn't though...) he could actually claim that that very statement was itself a biased in-universe opinion of a character.

So he could get out of it if he wanted to and was smart enough. I don't give him that much credit though, I doubt he realizes the loophole he left himself, and I do believe he did fully intend for that message to be taken literally by the readers, to cover his ass for the countless mistakes of the new books.



That is a good thought, didn't really consider the "character" being wrong as an excuse...honestly it wouldn't surprise me if he just said it was in Frank Herbert's notes or something stupid like that.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 21 Aug 2011 23:50
by A Thing of Eternity
The reality is he's unlikely to ever address such a specific issue. We've had members communicate with him, and he dancers around everything - if he got any better at avoiding the questions asked him he'd be Sarah Palin.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 08:52
by Freakzilla
They've only ever admitted to one error and they won't tell us what it was. :roll:

http://www.frankherbert.net/FAQ.html

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 08:55
by SandChigger
Yeah, and he's only done that in private communication... that ended up becoming not so private after all. :lol:

I don't think he's ever specifically addressed the issue, and no interviewer since has had the balls to put the prick on the spot.

(Kinda difficult when most of the "interviews" are conducted by email and putting the shit-sucker on the spot would probably result in him refusing to complete/return the thing. Of course, an interviewer could still publicize that fact if they wanted: ANDERSON DUCKS HARD QUESTIONS! ;) )

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 09:22
by lotek
Freakzilla wrote:They've only ever admitted to one error and they won't tell us what it was. :roll:

http://www.frankherbert.net/FAQ.html


the error was to put that wanker in charge(or to let him behave like if he was)

ANDERSON DUCKS HARD QUESTIONS


now try saying this super fast several times in a row.

Image

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 15:35
by SandRider
SandChigger: As for the “secrecy” surrounding the notes and outline, I didn’t mean to suggest that they be released before the novels! Only that it would be interesting to study them later.

Keith: But if I take your comment at face value, then there should be nobody even raising the issue until after the publication of SANDWORMS. That’s not the case. People have been complaining for years and accusing us of being “secretive.” Brian and I have held onto our drafts but, as I mentioned to you before, I don’t think we have very much incentive to publish our drafts and notes. (I’m not aware of any author who does that, anyway.) The finished novel is what we put forth for the readers, and we should be judged by that.



some people might think this was an example of tehKJA "dancering" around the question, or that he was obfuscating slyly;
but if I take his comment at face value, then there should be nobody even raising the issue that KEVIN J. ANDERSON is not
dumber than a box of fucking rocks ....

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 15:43
by Freakzilla
SandRider wrote:
SandChigger: As for the “secrecy” surrounding the notes and outline, I didn’t mean to suggest that they be released before the novels! Only that it would be interesting to study them later.

Keith: But if I take your comment at face value, then there should be nobody even raising the issue until after the publication of SANDWORMS. That’s not the case. People have been complaining for years and accusing us of being “secretive.” Brian and I have held onto our drafts but, as I mentioned to you before, I don’t think we have very much incentive to publish our drafts and notes. (I’m not aware of any author who does that, anyway.) The finished novel is what we put forth for the readers, and we should be judged by that.



some people might think this was an example of tehKJA "dancering" around the question, or that he was obfuscating slyly;
but if I take his comment at face value, then there should be nobody even raising the issue that KEVIN J. ANDERSON is not
dumber than a box of fucking rocks ....



Dumber than the box the rocks came in.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 15:51
by SandRider
goddamn the motherfucking Orthodox Herbertarian Fairness Doctrine:

> from the previous email, that Keith did not quote in its' entirety or context:

SandChigger: As for the “secrecy” surrounding the notes and outline, I didn’t mean to suggest that they be released before the novels! Only that it would be interesting to study them later. (Another thing I hope you and Brian have held onto is your drafts. I think they would be fascinating from the point of view of research on the process of collaborative writing.)


so the preceding snipe, while amusing and entirely believable in so far as it is exactly in line
with Keith's known <lack of> character, is, in fact, itself "cherry-picking" and quoting out-of-context ....

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 16:00
by SandRider
also: Chigger, have these emails been on hairyticks all along ?
I realized I have only read snippets and quotes from them in the clubhouse ....


(also then, shouldn't they be archived with the shitheel's other "interviews" in the Basement @T(A)U ?)
(there's more relevant information & horseshit to nit-pick over in them than in all the other stuff combined ...)


and somewhere up above, you mentioned the soft-ball fanboi interviews, which got me to thinking about the
material in the shitheel's archived interviews : has either one of them, alone or as co-joined assholes, ever
been interviewed by a real journalist ... has any interview ever actually appeared in print, in a quarterly
publication, or any magazine not on the same row as Tiger Beat & Seventeen ?

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 20:39
by Shepherd492
SandRider wrote:also: Chigger, have these emails been on hairyticks all along ?
I realized I have only read snippets and quotes from them in the clubhouse ....


(also then, shouldn't they be archived with the shitheel's other "interviews" in the Basement @T(A)U ?)
(there's more relevant information & horseshit to nit-pick over in them than in all the other stuff combined ...)


and somewhere up above, you mentioned the soft-ball fanboi interviews, which got me to thinking about the
material in the shitheel's archived interviews : has either one of them, alone or as co-joined assholes, ever
been interviewed by a real journalist ... has any interview ever actually appeared in print, in a quarterly
publication, or any magazine not on the same row as Tiger Beat & Seventeen ?


I would very much like to interview them, I promise you there would be no "soft-balling"! Kind of sucks that they would probably only agree to be interviewed if they get to approve of the questions beforehand.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 22 Aug 2011 21:34
by Nekhrun
Shepherd492 wrote:I would very much like to interview them, I promise you there would be no "soft-balling"! Kind of sucks that they would probably only agree to be interviewed if they get to approve of the questions beforehand.

That's why you'll never get a question answered.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 23 Aug 2011 00:09
by SandChigger
SandRider wrote:also: Chigger, have these emails been on hairyticks all along ?

All of my webpages contain an HTML comment line at the end giving creation and update info for the page, so you just have to check the page source. The page in question says
<!-- Updated 20110205:21:25 JST hm; 20101228:12:03 JST hm; 20100509:11:50 JST hm; Created 20100501:19:25 JST hm -->

so I created the file on May 1 of last year. The page itself says "9 May 2010", so it looks like I worked on it for over a week before actually making it public. (I do that a lot.)

I always thought it would be fun, if I had the money, to put a PI on the dick's track for a week. You know, someone hi-tech with long-range mics who could record him while out DICtahiking. ;) :lol:

I'm sure that would involve several violations of his privacy and rights, but it's fun to imagine such mayhem sometimes... :twisted:

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 23 Aug 2011 02:51
by JustSomeGuy
Shepherd492 wrote:I would very much like to interview them, I promise you there would be no "soft-balling"! Kind of sucks that they would probably only agree to be interviewed if they get to approve of the questions beforehand.


The thing to do would be to make them look like assholes without being obvious about it. Subtlety. It would not do to set off any alarms.


I know Norman Spinrad pretty much called them on their bullshit. Have any other well-known authors done the same?

Mr. SandChigger, will you be writing The SandChigger Companion to Dune: House Atreides?

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 23 Aug 2011 02:58
by Ampoliros
I like to read that Spinrad interview to make my insides all warm. Its nice to see someone inside the biz call a hack a hack.

Re: Accountability?

Posted: 23 Aug 2011 07:55
by SandChigger
JustSomeGuy wrote:Mr. SandChigger, will you be writing The SandChigger Companion to Dune: House Atreides?

I've heard a rumor to that effect somewheres... ;)