more than ably demonstrated that these 'silly rules' (or the way
that he distorts them at least) exist only in his own head (and in
the heads of those who agree with his catalogue of exagger-
ation, disingenuity and misinterpretation.)
you apply the term 'comic' to any and all paper-covered periodicals
in the comics-section shelves of a newsagent, recognize that the
categorization is often the result of simple expediency.
is therefore regarded as a 'comic'. So the word has taken on a much
mate application; after all, if something is perceived as belong-
ing to a particular category, doesn't it actually become so
after a while? Let me apply my mighty brain.
interchangeably. The word now has a more general application, as
well as a specific one. So, even were I (and others) to subscribe to
the limited definition of a comic as derided on that other blog, his
negative classification of that as 'silly rules' is surely a purely
subjective one, coloured by his willingness to include just
about any magazine in the kids' section of newsagents
all across the country.
ject as he accuses the other side of being. By his own standard,
his opinion has therefore no more validity than anyone
else's. Hoist by his own petard, methinks.
But, as I hope I've illustrated, it's a more complicated
matter than may at first appear on casual consideration.
grab about 'ridiculous rules' coming from those who 'collected
See you next time.