Re: Samuel Delany

[Chris Brady <cdbrady@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I hasten to add that I do not dispute Delany's point at all.  To the
contrary.
I have noticed, though, that recent US history textbooks, compared to
the late-80s/early 90s, are beginning to kowtow to the Texas Committees
by slighting the Gay Lib movement.

I went through a Delany period in the late 1970s-early'80s?
Read Dhalgren, Triton, something else.
Was entranced with his style and the past-the-limit narrative.
Then I heard him on late night radio.
After listening a while, I called up with a tentative query about a
certain interpretation, that is of mine about one of his tomes. He
remonstrated me rather roundly on the air for not getting it, that it
was perfectly clear.  I had made the gross error of having seen it as
inductive and he was strictly deductive.  Or something like that.  A
no-doubt-about-it position.  I do remember how I felt.
I was at a loss for words, and hung up.
But that was before I read the CM.