Originally posted by Ben "cA" Risa
Not necessarily at all and absolutely not as far as my intended message when I said that is concerned. I feel it goes without saying that what people consider the best in fields such as writing and storytelling is largely a subjective process and that rarely would somebody choose to ignore the subjective areas and focus solely on the objective merits of those disciplines. That is absolutely how I meant it, and how I feel most people would approach this topic, to the point that I feel it isn't worth making the extra effort to specify as much.People see the word "best", their natural approach is what they personally consider the best, likewise if they see the term "of all time" usually they think of applying a universal standard. Being unnecessarily exact in these matters can be a subtle form of inefficiency.
Not necessarily as the people who mentioned Stan Lee maintained that position after I drew the distinction between "best" and "greatest" and -PR-'s response seemed to indicate that he simply valued certain aspects of his style and methodology, and his imaginative character-building over such things as dialogue and scientific accuracy, in considering him the best.
Good story. I didn't really want to get into this with you. There was some confusion, and I offered some advice for disambiguation. Take it or leave it in your threads. It's not worth playing "yuh-huh, nuh-uh" over who's right.
kittymeow