The following communication is continued correspondence between Professor Cesario de Torium and Professor Recamundus de Gelgadongo. In the two previous letters between the rival clerics, they discussed the potential repercussions of how the subjects of their poetry are portrayed, and what effect that may have on listeners. Each of them has dismissed the other’s words as a rhetorical form of saber rattling, trying to prove their superiority in the arts by confusing the meaning of their rival’s work.
The letter that follows is written by Professor Recamundus de Gelgadongo to his counterpart in Torium, Professor Cesario. This is in response to the second letter from Cesario.
Dear contemporary cleric Cesario,
I am terribly afraid it is you who have missed the point of my original communication. While you and I both are entirely capable of separating reality from fantasy, as are the learned gentry of our time, these good people are hardly the point of my concern. You see, to put it quite plainly, the masses are not as disciplined as you and I are in understanding context and historical application of literary work. To put it even more plainly as to not once again allow my words any room for misinterpretation, and so that even someone in the High Tower in Torium may rightfully understand it the first time it is stated: the lowest class persons are the easiest to incite into violence and the easiest to manipulate for a darker agenda. Words that we academics write matter, as they directly influence those with the least education.
My fear is that by even putting the name of an outlaw on parchment and discussing the horrible things he did in any light, rather than simply letting his misdeeds be forgotten over time, we have instead given the unwashed masses not only an alternative to rightful pursuit of citizenry, but a song to sing whilst planning horrible deeds.
This is the crux of the issue that I have with your work. Please understand it is with heavy hand that I write this response, as I have nothing but the utmost respect for your work prior to this questionable literature you have put forth.
Perhaps it is best if you return to the work you once pursued earlier in your career, when you discussed the beauty of butterflies and coney rabbits. Perhaps that is the type of work for which you are best suited.
P.S. Thank you for your praise of my poem “White Walls Black”. I know that even reading what you wrote you must have seen how silly your argument appeared, so I offer no rebuttal for what you have put forth in the prior letter.Professor Recamundus de Gelgadongo