Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Particle_Man" data-source="post: 1708241" data-attributes="member: 892">If I accept that the Donaldson's "point" in the Thomas Covenant series was to show that a messiah (world saver) is different from a nice guy, or even from a minimally decent person, will you accept that I, and many other people, simply don't want to read about messiahs that rape people?  Even if we get the author's point?  Can you accept that I for one would think the world would be a better place if no one ever again writes a book about a messiah that rapes people?  Even if I get the author's point?  Frankly, some points are not worth making in novel form, IMHO.Oh, and my own point about moral heroes predating American heroes only needs one pure knight to be made, even if we granted you Uther, etc.  And that knight was Sir Galahad, I believe.  Since tales of Sir Galahad predated the first American written novel or short story, there we go.  Moral Heroes existed before the American written novel or written short story, and hence before the American hero.Also, I am relieved to see that Mallory's Lancelot did not rape Elaine; my glasses might be rose colored but I don't think my memory is so clouded that I would forget that Lancelot was a rapist.  But if you have a quote from Mallory in which Lancelot does rape Elaine, please feel free to share it.  I might be wrong on that point (but not on the point of a moral hero predating American heroes.</blockquote>