Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Comments from an atheist

Hey there. It took a while but I got an old college friend who, unfortunately, has since become an activist atheist, to read and comment on The Pilate Plot. I wanted his point of view and it has proved valuable to me. He will soon write a formal review on his blog ( . If you visit the blog - just be prepared to hear many unkind things said about your own faith and points of view. I may post parts of that review here when it appears. In the meantime I wanted to pass on some of the comments my friend shared with me and perhaps hear from you concerning them. Naturally, the more I can learn, the better job I can do with any future writing. I'll start with something small. So, here's one of my atheist friend's observations. 'Nathaniel Stone's dialect is as annoying as Jar Jar Binks and as irrelevant to the character.' Let me know what you think. Thanks.


andrew said...

I say boo to your athiest friend's assesment of Stone's character. I thouht stone was an excellent, well written, and lovable character. While Jar Jar Binks was an unecessary, and anoying comic diversion Stone was credible and entertaining.

Chris said...

Yes I agree with Andrew in this case. The language was slightly hard for me to follow, and perhaps could have been edited slightly to make reading easier on the more elderly portion of your audience. However Stone was a key character in the story, and I'm sure will be a fan favorite to about 90% of the readers of The Pilate Plot. Jar Jar Binks was extremely annoying, but perhaps that was because he seemed so completely out of place with the previous Star Wars movies setting. He was also ugly, and was obviously thrown into the story to appeal to young children. Stone's dialect may have been different than what we are used to hearing, but it definitely wasn't childish, or unintelligent. It was also obviously not tossed into the novel to make readers laugh. Stone simply caused us to look at ideas we are perhaps familiar with in a different way.