Scott Schultz wrote: > However, I think it's more likely that we list members are > giving the books the I Ching treatment. That is, with no > new story to talk about, we go over the previous stories, > subjecting small details to scrutiny and finding meanings > between the lines of what would otherwise be innocuous and > straight-forward paragraphs. I think it's a tribute to how well written Steve's books are that there is room for us to speculate on these details. [insert my standard discussion of intentio auctoris v. lectoris => operis here]* Casey *If you're unfamilliar with it, search for Eco in the mailing list archive for pointers.