I mistakenly critiqued ONE concert that I wasn't at, basing it on the poor quality of their album. I admitted to my mistake, which I don't see as uncommon (how many of us can't remember if we've seen or not seen such and such crap movie, yet we still remember it as crap)
I never critiqued Thompson's writings. I simply said that based on the critiques of OTHERS, I don't have much interest in reading them.
Is his writing anything like William S. Burroughs? He's another guy people proclaim a genius, but who I thought was total crap.
I did like the Hubert Selby, Jr. that I read.
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Don't forget that Rhett is the same guy that critiques concert performances he didn't see. So why is anyone in the least bit surprised that he would criticize the work of an author he never read?
Originally posted by azaghal1981:
Thompson's writings were about a hell of a lot more than "drugs and booze." The majority of them were thought-provoking analyses of the world around him which gave his readers an insight that nobody before him has ever provided. You should, umm, maybe read one of his works before taking the bullshit about him in the main stream media as fact?
[/b]