Posited: When a critic says “George R.R. Martin is a conservative authoritarian who believes monarchy is a great system of government,” they’re not referring to the real George R.R. Martin. They’re talking about an imaginary George R.R. Martin they dreamed up while reading one of his books. If you confuse the real GRRM with that imaginary one solely because the critic is referring to the imaginary one with by the real author’s name, that’s only because you’re insufficiently knowledgeable about criticism.
I’m agnostic about whether this is true or not, but if it is, that rule would be just as stupid as if it’s a made up thing.
By the way, if you’re not reading James Nicoll’s LJ and comment section, you’re missing out.
Mirrored from Twenty Palaces. You can comment here or there.