[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Dinosaurs in the Media



> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for yours.
> 
> I would, respectfully,  beg to differ.
> 
> This is NOT AN INFORMAL LIST.
> It has rules.
> If you are not familiar with them, please write to me and I'll be
happy
> to send you the URL where they are posted.
> Off topic posts are grounds for TIME OUTS and total expulsion from the
> list.
> 

It is too an informal list.  Just because it is structured rather than
chaotic doesn't mean it isn't informal.  You won't ever see the
publication of any true scholarly work on the list because it is _an
informal list._  I don't need a copy of the rules; I know them.  But
their presence doesn't change the nature of the list in any way, and
Godzilla can be interpreted as dinosaur related, perhaps much more so
than posts that are traditionally tolerated as "close enough." 
Certainly more so than posts about how "off topic" the poster thinks a
certain thread may have drifted, or how lame people are who send
attachments, and things like that.


> If you want to talk about movie aesthetics, there is certainly nothing
> wrong with that, but NOT HERE! Do it somewhere else. Write an article
> for my magazine, and I'll publish it if it is any good, has real
> insights  and isnot just some  sort of fannish stuff.
> 

The movie aesthetics weren't central to the (one) post I made on the
subject.  I don't think writing Godzilla off as "completely unrelated
to anything this list wants to hear about" just because it didn't
rigorously follow scientific interpretations of what a creature like
Godzilla may have theoretically been like if it could have existed, or
other aesthetic or scientific issues that list members may have with
the movie is silly, though.  I reiterate my point:  Dinosaurs and the
Media is a valid subject for discussion among dinosaur enthusiasts and
dinosaurologists.  If so, there wouldn't be sections on it in so many
popular dinosaur books, _The Complete Dinosaur_ being a very
respectable example.  And, no, I'm not really interested enough in
Godzilla to really reply more to it, but I _do_ think that dinosaurs
in the media, and the perception of the general public of dinosaurs
are vital subjects for dinosaurologists.  Without the former, there
wouldn't be any funding for the latter!  :)  Now, after making this
point, which I think is important, I will agree that the thread was
definately drifting off topic, and into material that really doesn't
have a place on the list.


> Raiders of the Lost Ark has F*&&(*NG little to do with dinosaurs. I
LOVE
> Raiders of the Lost Ark. But this list is for dinosaurs.
> 

Raiders of the Lost Ark has nothing to do with Godzilla, either, while
Godzilla does have something to do with dinosaurs, esp. with the
public perception of dinosaurs.  Granted, nobody in the "general
public" will think Godzilla is a realistic dinosaur, but everyone will
see the new design of Godzilla and link it easily with what they saw
in the Jurassic Park movies and suppose that the new Godzilla's design
was influenced by modern dinosaur science.


> Hope you enjoy godzilla. I did.
> CheerZ,
> ES


I'm expecting to.  Thanks!

Joshua Dyal
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com