<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Remind me not to mess with John Banville</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2005/08/25/remind-me-not-to-mess-with-john-banville/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2005/08/25/remind-me-not-to-mess-with-john-banville/</link>
	<description>Random samplings from a universe of ideas.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:59:24 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2005/08/25/remind-me-not-to-mess-with-john-banville/comment-page-1/#comment-2403</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2005 19:23:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2005/08/25/remind-me-not-to-mess-with-john-banville/#comment-2403</guid>
		<description>He&#039;d have been better off sticking to his last point (i.e., &#039;there&#039;s not much substantive in your letter, old stick&#039;) without what almost appears to be an avoidance of the fact that rather misunderstood the fact from the book which he (as quoted) used in his condemnatory review.

Something along the lines (suitably wittily embellished) of &#039;I was wrong, but the bulk of what I said still stands, and you suck for not writing anything more substantive in your letter&#039; would have been more entertaining.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>He&#8217;d have been better off sticking to his last point (i.e., &#8216;there&#8217;s not much substantive in your letter, old stick&#8217;) without what almost appears to be an avoidance of the fact that rather misunderstood the fact from the book which he (as quoted) used in his condemnatory review.</p>
<p>Something along the lines (suitably wittily embellished) of &#8216;I was wrong, but the bulk of what I said still stands, and you suck for not writing anything more substantive in your letter&#8217; would have been more entertaining.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
