> Well, looks like I'll have to disagree again. You asked who has the > right to determine what you can and cannot read. Well, I'm just > wondering who gave you the right to tell people what they should or > should not get involved in when reading a story? It's kind of the same > thing, isn't it? > > If I wanted to read something and not get involved in the writer's > beliefs (and my own beliefs, for that matter) or the symbolism of the > story, I'd probably try the comics. Or maybe I'd go to a movie just to > get a story for the story's sake. To me, it's a difference between > education and entertainment. And I think I can say this without being > TOO wrong, but reading without actively participating in what we read > isn't really reading at all. > First of all you misinterpreted what I said. I meant that just because one doesn't agree or believe in the writer's beliefs, etc... doesn't meant that they shouldn't enjoy the story. Second of all I never said what anyone should or should not get involved in when reading a story. By all means go ahead and do whatever you want, it's a free country. By Matt's letter it seemed to me like he was forbidding me to discuss Rand but I never said that about interpreting stories. Thirdly I also get involved with the symbolism of stories, I find symbolism very interesting, but I don't use it to judge a stories worth. Fourthly when I read I read for both entertainment and education.That's it. -Liz Friedman _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com