Re: brouhaha

Jim writes:
<< In this sense the distinction between "meaning" and "applicability" [. .
. .] does [. . .] insist on a preference for the specific cultural
referents, etc., meaningful to the author -- a preference that needs to be
justified, of course. >>

I agree that this is a question for the philosophical mind to consider --
though I'm not so sure that it "needs" to be considered or justified by the
casual reader, or even critic. I do suspect, however, that anyone who would
immediately dismiss a reading of Moby Dick that puts Ishmael's place in the
program of providence in Bush's presidency (perhaps making the Arab
harpooner out to be bin Laden), or who would be reluctant about a reading of
Shakespeare that requires in the word "gay" a suggestion of homosexuality,
yet who claims to be dubious about the preference you mention -- I do
suspect that this person rather needs to consider it.

(If, on the other hand, he wouldn't flinch at my saying that Moby Dick is in
some way about the War on Terror -- however he takes "meaning" -- or at
"homosexual" being a valid and valuable reading of the word "gay" in 17th
century English tragedy, then by all means he can interpret away, and I'll
respect him as one who acts consistently with his beliefs. Though he will,
I hope, forgive me for not reading his criticism, because I doubt that it
would appeal to my personal interests.)

-robbie
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Mon Apr 21 19:43:00 2003