Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

This is Bosch Fawstin

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Guest Guest_FAWSTIN_

There is a possible implication here that nothing is obscene (represented by this use of the word "prude" as a package-deal). But if you acknowledge that some ideas are morally obscene, then you must acknowledge that words can certainly be obscene by virtue of the ideas they represent. Words have specific meanings, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

By the way, the above quote does not represent a valid argument. Rather, it's an instance of the fallacy known as the argument by intimidation, and it won't work here.

It obviously has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The key to understanding Fawstin is to recognize his central pursuit--his operative desire--which has served as the motivator of nearly all his comments on this thread: to chivvy people. He gets his kicks from shocking, embarrassing, insulting, patronizing, belittling, or simply just puzzling people. His last, defiant remark--that his argument by intimidation has obviously worked--is a fine example of his attitude: The purpose is not to make a rational argument, not even to say something related to reality, not even to uphold his own honor (didn't he simply admit having made an argument by intimidation?)--just to sound, as he would say, like an "individualist."

I find his act a rather entertaining piece of comedy.

BTW, I think his choice of his favorite profane insult is somewhat strange. If it were prefixed with "mother," now then I would agree it's an insult, as it would mean a person who has, on at least one occasion, committed incest with his mother. Without such a prefix, however, it brings to mind a man whose defining characteristic is his success in romance--probably a man who is still young, but has already made enough money to devote much of his time to the company of his wife, and is in a very good physical condition to boot. Putting aside the rudeness of the word, I think it is actually quite a compliment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key to understanding Fawstin is to recognize his central pursuit--his operative desire--which has served as the motivator of nearly all his comments on this thread: to chivvy people. He gets his kicks from shocking, embarrassing, insulting, patronizing, belittling, or simply just puzzling people. His last, defiant remark--that his argument by intimidation has obviously worked--is a fine example of his attitude: The purpose is not to make a rational argument, not even to say something related to reality, not even to uphold his own honor (didn't he simply admit having made an argument by intimidation?)--just to sound, as he would say, like an "individualist."

I find his act a rather entertaining piece of comedy.

BTW, I think his choice of his favorite profane insult is somewhat strange. If it were prefixed with "mother," now then I would agree it's an insult, as it would mean a person who has, on at least one occasion, committed incest with his mother. Without such a prefix, however, it brings to mind a man whose defining characteristic is his success in romance--probably a man who is still young, but has already made enough money to devote much of his time to the company of his wife, and is in a very good physical condition to boot. Putting aside the rudeness of the word, I think it is actually quite a compliment.

For the record, I get along fine with Matt on these boards, there's mutual respect and also a genuine interest from him to check out a book by a Rand fan, which I would think most Rand fans would.

And I suggest trying a less boring way of getting your dull points across. You may hold my interest for more than the few sentences I read of yours. I mean, you want to insult me?, get to the damn point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually checked out your site, and although I too think that you could've toned the laguage down for the protagonist (even though it is a preview and just one word from "him") I also think that you have a very nice way with words. My favorite part was actually the press release: "I walk into a crowded room... not a soul in sight... then she walks in". Taken in the right contex (since I haven't read the work I've put it in my own) it is very nicely said. Also, the artwork does seem good... have you spent any time learning art? If you haven't, it defenitly appears so.

So, all in all I actually might be interested in it if I like graphic novels (is that what they're called?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually checked out your site, and although I too think that you could've toned the laguage down for the protagonist (even though it is a preview and just one word from "him") I also think that you have a very nice way with words. My favorite part was actually the press release: "I walk into a crowded room... not a soul in sight... then she walks in". Taken in the right contex (since I haven't read the work I've put it in my own) it is very nicely said. Also, the artwork does seem good... have you spent any time learning art? If you haven't, it defenitly appears so.

So, all in all I actually might be interested in it if I like graphic novels (is that what they're called?).

Thanks for the compliments, appreciate them. The profanity was a choice in style, one that I think works out just fine and while it may put some people off, I think most will appreciate the context of it all and go with it.

I posted the part in the book that has the narrative you cited below, without the addition of 'Then she walks in' which was only added for ad purposes.

I've been drawing all of my life and I took some formal illustration night classes in NY a few years ago that helped me discipline my drawing abilities to the level where I was confident enough to draw this story.

Yes, these larger Comic BOOKS are referred to as graphic novels. And if you do end up getting a copy, send me your thoughts and feelings on it, I have a forum set up on my website at the time of my books release.

Best,

Bosch

post-9-1076225213_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

My graphic novel, TABLE FOR ONE, is in stores today, 2/25/04.

My first 2 online reviews are at:

http://popimage.com/ in 'Until Your Heart Stops vs2.7 2/25/04

and the other is at: http://www.the-trades.com/column.php?columnid=2378

Table For One by Bosch Fawstin · Book Review

by Howard Price - Feb 26, 2004

If Will Eisner were going to do a graphic novel about a night in a restaurant, "Table For One" is the graphic novel he would have done

'02/25/04: UNTIL YOUR HEART STOPS v2.7: Just when you think your beloved sequential drug of choice is about to be overrun in a sea of mediocrity, a shining light appears to renew your passion. This week Brian Domingos looks at the new graphic novel Table For One by Bosch Fawstin. In stores Today.....'

Bosch Fawstin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Ash, I received and read Table For One, but I'm gonna hold off on a review until I read it a second time. Since I'm taking off for a short vacation tomorrow, that won't be until at least next week.

Bosch -- the guy who runs the comic book store/cafe where I got the book told me you're going to be coming in to sign copies at some point. He didn't tell me when it was going to be, though... I'll probably try to stop in and say hi, since it's basically right down the road. Do you know what the date is on it, if you guys have set one? The store is called "Comic Cafe", or "Sanctuary", in New Brunswick -- it's really kinda two businesses in one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not usually a fan of comics and the like, but I was made quite interested by the previews. I don't think the language was a turnoff at all (though the yucky ugly guys were, maybe!).

As far as profanity goes, I see no reason for people to get their metaphorical panties in a bundle over it. There are plenty of situations in which cursing delivers one's meaning in a better, more conscise manner than not cursing. I only find the use of "foul" language really foul when it's to the exclusion of more expressive means of communication.

I've heard it argued that most curse words are degrading to either sex or the body, but I think that's crap. So called "biblical" swearing doesn't directly refer to the object of the cursing (ie: "Jesus Christ" or "Oh, hell"). Neither does "sexual cursing" ("fuck you"). These things are uttered as expletive: [profane or obscene expression usually of surprise or anger (obscene being "Offensive to accepted standards of decency or modesty").]

There's my two cents on the matter. Decency be damned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt, appreciate you reading the book and in your next read, look out for some visual puns and such that I've hidden within the story And on the cover. On my forum, I posted a 'TFO Easter Eggs' post where I mention that anyone who can guess at 3 or more of them gets a signed sketch of Will. Looking forward to your take on my story.

I'll have to get back to you on a store signing, I just had one at Little Shop of Comics in Scotch Plains two weeks ago.

I know that my girlfriends' stepfather mentioned my book to the owner of a comic shop/cafe in Somerville. That may be the same guy who owns the one in New Brunswick. I'm going to visit the shop in New Brunswick Wed, since I planned on getting out there anyway.

I also just gave an interview to objectivist Chris Davis on his blog at:

http://chrisdavis.typepad.com/blog/2004/03..._fawstin_i.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not usually a fan of comics and the like, but I was made quite interested by the previews.  I don't think the language was a turnoff at all (though the yucky ugly guys were, maybe!).

As far as profanity goes, I see no reason for people to get their metaphorical panties in a bundle over it.  There are plenty of situations in which cursing delivers one's meaning in a better, more conscise manner than not cursing.  I only find the use of "foul" language really foul when it's to the exclusion of more expressive means of communication. 

I've heard it argued that most curse words are degrading to either sex or the body, but I think that's crap.  So called "biblical" swearing doesn't directly refer to the object of the cursing (ie: "Jesus Christ" or "Oh, hell").  Neither does "sexual cursing" ("fuck you").  These things are uttered as expletive: [profane or obscene expression usually of surprise or anger (obscene being "Offensive to accepted standards of decency or modesty").]

There's my two cents on the matter.  Decency be damned.

Appreciate the 'defense' of the use of profanity in fiction. The only place I've gotten any real flack over my use of it was on this board. Most objectivists/Rand admirers weren't bugged by it at all, and if they were, it was only in regards to the Hero of the story, Will Howland, employing it.

As Objectivist Chris Davis posted on my forum about this topic:

'Speaking from my personal experience with other Objectivists ........many neglect or fail to define a line between necessary values and optional values, which would explain why some tossed your work aside just because of profanity (!). For instance, the black and white attitude of William was necessary to correctly portray the values you uphold. It wasn't absolutely necessary for him to use profanity, or for the antagonist to be grotesque in order to get your point across. They were options, and you chose them.'

I think he made a Great point about Necessary and Optional values.

William Howland doesn't use profanity promiscuously like the rest of the characters in the story do. He mainly curses when he's pissed off and fires a verbal weapon at the one who's done him wrong. But his character and actions aren't profane..........unless you're like these two reviewers, (one, a self-titled 'Deep Liberal) who, while overall praising the book and my talents, felt a desire to beat Will up.....

http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/revi...87032837135.htm

http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/movie/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding Circe's comments on profanity: so-called "Biblical" profanity could only be profane to someone who believes in the supernatural concepts being referenced, and holds them to be sacred; "sexual" cursing could only not be profane to someone who doesn't hold the concepts being referenced to be sacred. Both considerations are objective, not optional.

Incidentally, Bosch's complaint that his work is being dismissed solely on the basis of his choice to include profanity is false (and a straw man). My reason for being hesitant to buy the book (as should be clear to anyone who has honestly read this thread) has less to do with his use of profanity as such, than with his reaction to what was originally intended as constructive criticism on that point (and only tentative criticism at that, as it was based only on a few preview panels) and his behavior on this board in general.

Basically, if Bosch's hero acts anything like Bosch (even leaving the profanity aside entirely), then I have absolutely no interest in spending my money on this.

Edited by AshRyan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally, Bosch's complaint that his work is being dismissed solely on the basis of his choice to include profanity is false (and a straw man).  My reason for being hesitant to buy the book (as should be clear to anyone who has honestly read this thread) has less to do with his use of profanity as such, than with his reaction to what was originally intended as constructive criticism on that point (and only tentative criticism at that, as it was based only on a few preview panels) and his behavior on this board in general.

Basically, if Bosch's hero acts anything like Bosch (even leaving the profanity aside entirely), then I have absolutely no interest in spending my money on this.

Your 'disinterest' in my book was apparent from the 1st of your 8 posts on this topic when you agreed with Alp that the profanity was a real turnoff, which is indeed a decision to dismiss it 'solely on the basis of (my) choice to include profanity'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Golly gee whiz, here I am, just browsing through the intros, getting to know folks, and then I find myself here.

Bosch, you've laid out your reasons, sort of, for doing things the way you have. I have no interest in your genre, so I'm not your target audience, profanity or no. As for profanity, in general, I don't care for it. It is so overused that it has lost any kind of shock value and usually points to a lack of thought in the individual who uses it. This may or may not be true in fiction, but it certainly is in life. It might make for an interesting discussion over in "Esthetics."

Since I wouldn't be someone who would read your work (as a simple matter of preference, and saying nothing about your artistic values), I would like to make an observation:

Obviously, most of the people on this forum know you from what you write here. Matt has read your work and seems impressed. I would like to be as impressed. I especially want to be impressed by those who espouse Objectivist values because there is so much mediocrity out there it is sometimes suffocating. On this forum, I have found that people do not hesitate to offer a stout defense of their arguments, but they do so within a civilized framework, showing a fundamental respect for others, premised on the idea that we are well-meaning even if we are mistaken.

I noticed that you were respectful only towards those who offered compliments. When you felt that you were being disagreed with, you didn't offer an argument, rather, you copped an attitude. Perhaps this isn't what was meant, in the beginning, but . . . . You may have something to say worth hearing, but you will do better if you don't behave as though you are being attacked. I thought you were just a little quick off the mark to be offended. I know how one can get to this point by just dealing with the world everyday. These days, people (especially young people) seem to confuse attitude with character and are so insecure in themselves that they attack at the least provocation. It is easy to find yourself doing the same.

People of good will can criticize with no disrespect intended. Engaging such people in reasoned argument goes much further than arguing from "attitude" and pouncing just because someone seems too abrupt.

Chill, and let us know what you THINK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your 'disinterest' in my book was apparent from the 1st of your 8 posts on this topic when you agreed with Alp that the profanity was a real turnoff, which is indeed a decision to dismiss it 'solely on the basis of (my) choice to include profanity'.

This is simply false, and I will refer anyone back to my first post in this thread for proof. I did not say at that point that I was not interested in the book. Rather, I agreed with ALP on the point of the foul language being a turnoff, offered some constructive criticism on that point, then offered praise on some other points (such as your artwork). And in subsequent posts, I even expressed interest in perhaps looking further into the book, if I was given more evidence of its value.

If I had had no interest, I wouldn't have participated in the discussion even to that extent (and I've gone much beyond that). As I have been saying all along, my problem with you is mainly with your attitude. Incidentally, you've given us a clue here to the reason for that attitude, in your interpretation of my first post as "disinterest" in your book: insecurity (as oldsalt has already suggested).

I will not continue to waste my time or further feed your insecurity by giving you the attention you crave, no matter what further absurd accusations you post against me. It should be obvious to anyone reading this thread by now what's going on here, and so I'm done with you.

Edited by AshRyan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Golly gee whiz, here I am, just browsing through the intros, getting to know folks, and then I find myself here. 

Bosch, you've laid out your reasons, sort of, for doing things the way you have.  I have no interest in your genre, so I'm not your target audience, profanity or no.  As for profanity, in general, I don't care for it.  It is so overused that it has lost any kind of shock value and usually points to a lack of thought in the individual who uses it.  This may or may not be true in fiction, but it certainly is in life.  It might make for an interesting discussion over in "Esthetics."

Since I wouldn't be someone who would read your work (as a simple matter of preference, and saying nothing about your artistic values), I would like to make an observation:

Obviously, most of the people on this forum know you from what you write here.  Matt has read your work and seems impressed.  I would like to be as impressed.  I especially want to be impressed by those who espouse Objectivist values because there is so much mediocrity out there it is sometimes suffocating.  On this forum, I have found that people do not hesitate to offer a stout defense of their arguments, but they do so within a civilized framework, showing a fundamental respect for others, premised on the idea that we are well-meaning even if we are mistaken.

I noticed that you were respectful only towards those who offered compliments.  When you felt that you were being disagreed with, you didn't offer an argument, rather, you copped an attitude.  Perhaps this isn't what was meant, in the beginning, but . . . .  You may have something to say worth hearing, but you will do better if you don't behave as though you are being attacked.  I thought you were just a little quick off the mark to be offended.  I know how one can get to this point by just dealing with the world everyday.  These days, people (especially young people) seem to confuse attitude with character and are so insecure in themselves that they attack at the least provocation.  It is easy to find yourself doing the same.

People of good will can criticize with no disrespect intended.  Engaging such people in reasoned argument goes much further than arguing from "attitude" and pouncing just because someone seems too abrupt.

Chill, and let us know what you THINK.

I have shown respect to those on this board who do not have a condescending tone in their posts and comments towards me. To those who don't feel a need to 'teach' me how to post on this board and who presume they have the ability to. I have my own style of expression and I don't ask anyone to change theirs, I just take people as they are and respond on that.

As for your writing that I behave as if I'm being attacked, I'm not......

But....I'd rather be attacked by people I philosophically disagree with than be patronized by those who I share the same philosophy with.

And regardless of your preconcieved notions about what graphic novels may be, it's just a different medium with as rich a potential as any other. And the Objectivists who have read my book and who don't even read graphic novels, have all enjoyed it to varying degrees, which has been very gratifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is simply false, and I will refer anyone back to my first post in this thread for proof. I did not say at that point that I was not interested in the book. Rather, I agreed with ALP on the point of the foul language being a turnoff, offered some constructive criticism on that point, then offered praise on some other points (such as your artwork). And in subsequent posts, I even expressed interest in perhaps looking further into the book, if I was given more evidence of its value.

If I had had no interest, I wouldn't have participated in the discussion even to that extent (and I've gone much beyond that). As I have been saying all along, my problem with you is mainly with your attitude. Incidentally, you've given us a clue here to the reason for that attitude, in your interpretation of my first post as "disinterest" in your book: insecurity (as oldsalt has already suggested).

I will not continue to waste my time or further feed your insecurity by giving you the attention you crave, no matter what further absurd accusations you post against me. It should be obvious to anyone reading this thread by now what's going on here, and so I'm done with you.

post-9-1079897558_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, well, I guess I've been put in my place good and proper. I apologize all over the place if I offended you by suggesting that you were too easily offended.

As for my supposed preconcieved ideas regarding your genre, I thought I made it clear that I had no preconcieved ideas regarding your genre. I know nothing about it, and your piss-poor attitude hasn't sparked any curiousity to learn. I don't care if you are or are not an Objectivist, bad-manners and disrespect are bad traits that I won't tolerate from anyone.

Now this is the last I'll say because I know from experience that when one reacts to temper-tantrums, one only encourages further bad behaviour.

(I wasn't being patronizing, by the way. I'm not being patronizing here, either. I'm being condescending.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, well, I guess I've been put in my place good and proper.  I apologize all over the place if I offended you by suggesting that you were too easily offended.

As for my supposed preconcieved ideas regarding your genre, I thought I made it clear that I had no preconcieved ideas regarding your genre.  I know nothing about it, and your piss-poor attitude hasn't sparked any curiousity to learn.  I don't care if you are or are not an Objectivist, bad-manners and disrespect are bad traits that I won't tolerate from anyone. 

Now this is the last I'll say because I know from experience that when one reacts to temper-tantrums, one only encourages further bad behaviour. 

(I wasn't being patronizing, by the way.  I'm not being patronizing here, either.  I'm being condescending.)

Indeed, you are condescending, which is a very ugly thing to be.

Nothing I wrote back to you was offensive in the least....UnLess you're easily offended, which you are.

And for someone who was so determinedly uninterested in my book in the first place for the weakest of reasons, you should at least thank me for giving you a Strong reason to remain uninterested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a question: Why do O'ists have this tendency to need to be condescending? What's the point of everybody being defensive/offensive here? Is it to get our points across? Because I'm not seeing points being got across. I'm seeing bickering.

I note in many of my Objectivist friends that they value being right so highly that they can be oblivious to a myriad of evidence to the contrary, sacrificing the actual truth to their psychological needs. They rationalize away the contradictions between their ideas and their feelings and their actions all the time. It's not serving them.

I used to be guilty of this, and I've been much happier and made much more progress--psychologically, philosophically and otherwise--since I stopped being so concerned with my interest in being right all the time and focused instead on finding out what the truth was, whether I liked what I found or not.

Is this you? Have the strength to admit it. Know thyself.

Good Premises,

Laura

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ash, I don't understand why Fawstin's reaction to anything affected your willingness to purchase his book. If you would buy the book for its content, Fawstin's reaction is not its content. There are plenty of overweight but good authors; does their weight change the nature of their work? It would not be that you are willing to patronize only those authors with traits you value, without regard for the content of their work. The justification "His hero is like him" is absurd.

Oldsalt, condescending (according to my interpretation of M-W) is either patronizing or voluntary abdication of pride and self-esteem; and patronizing is condescending.

Circe, I see no greater tendency to condescension among Objectivists than among any -ists. Rather, those for whom pride is the moral and self-esteem is the good would prefer ascension to condescension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...