Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ismnotwasm

(42,652 posts)
6. True, but I think
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 10:48 PM
Apr 2013

He wasn't the 'only one' to indulge himself. He was gentry, and therefore should have been protected to a certain extent. He seems to have wanted to rub others' faces in their own hypocrisy. I'm not a fan of his work, too self indulgent--but it's been a long, long while since I've read anything, so I'm kind of winging it here.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] Tuesday Afternoon Apr 2013 OP
I had no idea libodem Apr 2013 #1
Wow libodem Apr 2013 #2
I have read some of his books, and they are interesting for different reasons. ZombieHorde Apr 2013 #3
What's interesting ismnotwasm Apr 2013 #4
that he had no boundaries is fine ... Tuesday Afternoon Apr 2013 #5
True, but I think ismnotwasm Apr 2013 #6
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Philosophy»This message was self-del...»Reply #6