However, I think there are some lines that should never be intentionally crossed. Where those lines lie may be between you and your God. Our founding fathers tried to establish some of those lines in our Constitution. As for me, I just believe that always being willing to compromise as a general rule means living in a world without absolutes and everything becomes relative.

Part of his response is, “A man should not compromise his principles, but he need not flaunt them, as a banner. There is a time to talk and a time to be still.” It reminds me of the passage in Ecclesiastes Ch 3 vs 1-8, “For everything there is a season…”.

Hope everyone is having a blessed Easter.

In MY opinion good writing is always open to interpretation. It is intentionally vague. LL was a master at this. That doesn't mean that it is without detail, but that detail is judiciously applied, just enough to be convincing, not enough to get in the way of the audience's imagination and thus compromise their ability to became a co-creator in the experience of reading.

My take is that when characters speak they only speak for themselves. What they say may or may not be the true feelings of the author. If an audience member chooses to learn something from what is written, the audience member needs to realize that the words just guide all members of the audience in a GENERAL direction. Each reader takes their own path and reaches their own conclusion.

Art is not about what the artist expresses, it is about what it makes you, the audience member, THINK and FEEL.

My take is "Yeah, of course" ... but if you are trying to divine some sort of moral message that MUST be ABSOLUTELY consistent across dozens of works and several decades you could be asking too much of any writer or what he bothered to write down while trying to earn a living from one day to the next. In some ways it's easier for Dan Brown to say this, you can count his works on both hands, and you don't need both hands.

My feeling is that if you raise expectations too high you are asking for trouble and inviting disappointment. As was noted in another thread Dad could sometimes create a staggering number of pages in a very short time. Sometimes things said that are separated by many years, end up being in conflict with one another.

The baseline with Louis is: Have Fun With It ... but be careful taking it as scripture. Dad was an entertainer. He may have occasionally thought of himself as inspiring education through his writing. That means he wanted the work to open people's minds. It wasn't an education, it was intended to engage curiosity so the reader might then educate themselves through other works, works of non-fiction, on various subjects they found interesting.