Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:49, 10 August 2006

Who is that stupid who inserted this : "Istrati is noted for the sympathetic depiction of homosexual characters in his works."

There is no evidence for this in Istrati's works. On the contrary, Istrati shows repulsion for homosexuals, read "Life of Adrian Zografi".

Therefore I deleted that sentence.

A Romanian reader.

If you don't know what "sympathetic" is, better get yourself a dictionary (you might also find it uselful for seeing why "who is that stupid" is not in good English). Nobody was saying that it was "adulatory" or "gazing lovingly" or anything like that. Dahn 11:28, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I should said "who is stupid enough".

sympathetic: 1. Of, expressing, feeling, or resulting from sympathy: a sympathetic glance. 2. Favorably inclined: not at all sympathetic to her proposal. 3. Agreeably suited to one's disposition or mood; congenial: sympathetic surroundings.

Show us a few quotes from Istrati's works to support your affirmation regarding that "sympathy".

http://www.gayroma.it/z%2018%20settembre%202003%20b.asp " Kira Kyralina " non è solo un bel romanzo ma soprattutto ha la particolarità di avere come protagonista un omosessuale dichiarato, cosa molto rara in quei tempi.

Accolto nella famiglia, inquadrato come futuro erede dal padre, vittima di una società chiusa e rigidissima non aveva potuto confessare le sue paure alla ragazza. Anche lei era innamorata di lui e, dopo il matrimonio, aveva accettato la situazione, celandola ai familiari. L'amore platonico tra Stavro e la fanciulla dagli occhi neri è una delle parti più delicate e commoventi del romanzo e crea un netto contrasto con il mondo violento e barbarico in cui i due giovani si trovano a vivere.

E' giusto che Gide e Proust descrivessero il loro mondo sociale perché quasi sempre gli scrittori elaborano creativamente anche le classi sociali a cui appartengono o che comunque frequentano. Stavro in quanto gay proletario era una figura nuovissima nella letteratura europea. Dahn 11:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

First, it is not from Istrati's writings or sayings, it's just a commentary. Second, that commentary is from a biased source, what one can expect from www.gayroma.it ?! Besides, I cannot understand Italian, and we are discussing here an English Misplaced Pages article.

I have doubts you have read even one work of Istrati. And even if you dit it, it seems you cannot understand it. From depiction of a homosexual to sympathy is long way. You are just a stupid who consider himself more "European" by pushing in front your "opennes" about homosexuals. That sentence does not deserve to be in the article.

Romanian : cand o sa am timp, o pun aici niste citate din Istrati, toate anti-homo. Poate asa o sa-ti dai seama cat esti de prost si ce rau imens faci imaginii lui Istrati si Romaniei.

Cretinule. Dahn 13:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

1. The fragments cited basically say that Istrati was one of the first writers to see a homosexual as worthy of a leading role in a book. Yes, it may be biased (although I fail to see what the bias ammounts to), but the sentence mentions that "he is noted".
2. The stories of Istrati (all those I have read) have been modulated in tone by the plot (that is: you cannot reasonably expect all characters to express positive or whatever views on one topic, sice this is imaginative prose and not manifesto). Istrati's extreme liberalism can still be read throughout, and what should matter is that he introduced this very concern in Romanian literature.
3. Any future edit by this moron or of one of his sockpuppets should be erased swiftly: this person has basically just said that to "accuse" Istrati of seeing homosexuals as humans is "to slander him" ("and Romania"). In fact, he fails to note that Istrati is not sympathetic towards rape, and I suspect he views all homosexual relationships as being rape. Dahn 13:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

And let me add: this is about a sympathetic depiction of homosexual people, not neccessarily of homosexuality itself. Do you get the point? Istrati's time had not made this simple concession). Dahn 13:48, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

There is a less "biased" source (unfortunately, it is in Romanian): http://www.unibuc.ro/eBooks/filologie/lil/1-1.htm. Dahn 13:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Again you refer to commentaries, not the work itself. Your "sympathetic" appreciation is highly biased, and by saying "homosexual characters" not "one homosexual character" you want to leave the impression that is typical for him to depict homo people. Tell us at least three such characters in his work, to justify this generalization. And how a homo site (you linked www.gayroma.it) cannot be biased ?

I urge the readers to read the works of Panait Istrati to see why that sentence is a piece of crap. This is not reprezentative for Istrati. Unless you delete that sentence or move it to Controversies, I will delete it myself everytime I see it.

PS. Now I know why you inserted that "h" in your name "Dan", making it "Dahn". Dan the homo. You are an activist gay who promotes everything homosexual.

Look, I will not be inserting it back, since I do not think it is essential. But I believe I have made some clear points (you are not even capable of understanding them, reason why you come up with the same mediocretin question). I would not take insult in being called "a homosexual", but I happen not to be one. For Chrissake, not only do you have the nerve to assume a bias in a pathetic attack you launch at me with your prehistoric standards, but you have to do it on the basis of a letter in my nickname? God, man, you are indeed a piece of chauvinist garbage. Dahn 15:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Let's say, someone reads "Netoshka Nezvanova" by Dostoesvky, or only a comment about it, then modifies the article about Dostoevsky to say "he is noted for depiction of young lesbian characters in his works". That would be exactly the same thing. You generalized a minor fact and put it in front, like it was something essential. My "prehistoric standard" is the TRUTH. Yours is "modernity", "sexual tolerance", "opennes" all those done by deliberate falsification.

Your standard is calling me "a homosexual", assuming I would take offence. To call me "a deliberate falsifier" is to be able to prove that I have a bias. You cannot. You are a downtrotten troll. Dahn 16:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Plus: it would be exceptionally contrieved to define as "a conservative" a person who has shown himself a partisan of socialist and revolutionary causes throughout most of his life. Dahn 16:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh my God it is true what they said about Dahn - he sucks cock and he takes it in the ass. What do you like the most Dahn ? To be the men or the girl ? Do you swallow ?