by Christopher Mudiappahpillai

First of all, a general apology to those of you who have posted comments recently and not seen them appear here. Comment moderation was turned on, and I had no idea that there where comments waiting to be checked.

Secondly, a more specific apology to Kesi who is nice enough to visit often and comment on what I have to say.


Speaking of books, I was talking to my prof about the Lahiri book I mentioned recently, and she agrees with my assesment – it’s really not prize-worthy. So there.

was in no way directed at you. That was just me being me. In fact until just a few minutes ago, I had not seen either of your comments concerning Lahiri.

And, I’d be happy to explain my reasoning. Just give me a bit. I have an ethics exam that needs to be written in a few days.


One Comment

  1. December 16, 2005

    Thanks for the clarification. And no need for any apologies. But it’s good to know that you aren’t one to hide behind a professor’s opinion. Looking forward to reading your extended critique of Lahiri’s work. And good luck with grad school applications.
    P.S. For some reason (and I can’t pinpoint as to why) I have never been able to appreciate Raymond Carver’s short stories. Maybe because I am looking for more of a closure to a story than Carver seems to give me. Or maybe it is that I feel somewhat distant from his characters and the situations that they are in. Or maybe that I feel a tad bit depressed after reading his works. Again don’t know the exact reasons. In terms of short stories, give me Chekov or O.Henry any day for reading for pleasure and Carver – well Carver, I will reserve purely for the purposes of learning his style of storytelling.

Comments are closed.