正文

博克推薦: 感謝和聯想

(2006-06-30 10:16:17) 下一個

跟貼:  遠方的河博克 文化城和他的女博克們”

Web Link: http://blog.wenxuecity.com/blogview.php?date=200606&postID=12063#mark

 

Frankly I like your piece. In fact thanks to your writing I stayed in my office to click through some your favorite MM’s blogs without going out with my lunch buddies today. 

Even with limited time I still managed to read as much as I could. I’d be inclined to agree with your that some MM’s mentioned in your article has quite exquisite skills in crafting words. While some of them appears less dexterous, yet, her seemed plain personal stories of love and lose in life stroked a chord in my heart by filling in with warmth and sorrow at same time. These recordings of life reminded me of my struggled love with one girl back in a university in China 9 years ago. 

I think that your recommendations have provided me with a good starting pointing to appreciate these MM’s blogs, otherwise, I might have never spent time to find them out. Like many people on “the Street” time is one of least resources. 

However, I’d also like to apologize to you ahead of time for my other view that may be less sympathetic to yours. 

Apparently you’d dislike blogs authored by GG at WXC because they may be lack of distinctive characteristics. If my memories server me right I did find some GG’s writing were very thoughtful here. 

In my humble opinion, if an article or story, whether posted by MMs or GGs, can stir my emotions, convince me to act upon, permit me to relate, induce me to ponder or make a simple echo among the “canyons” in my mind it could be a good one. If I’d use gender, religion, age and pictures of MM & GG as the basis to narrow down my reading scope I am afraid that I might inadvertently exclude many good writings from MMs and GGs without a logical reason. My point is that if we could move up our tolerance threshold a bit higher it may expand our horizon. 

Nevertheless, you may be right about MMs at WXC tend to write in better quality and larger in quantity by large.  

Note: Minor changes have been made to weed out some typos on the original post.

 

[ 打印 ]
閱讀 ()評論 (1)
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.