Re: brouhaha

Jim writes:
<< [. . . ] the examples you provide are more the types of MISTAKES
[emphasis mine] a casual reader would make, and not a literary critic. You
use very poor examples of the work of literary critics [. . . .] This
[other, deleted, example] is a lot less CARTOONISH [emphasis mine] than
imagining someone past the undergraduate stage would think the word "gay"
means "homosexual" in Shakespeare's work. >>

I think you're dodging something here, whether you mean to be or not.

They are cartoonish and absurd. Very few people, I think, would fail to
dismiss them outright. This was precisely the point. But if (admittedly
uncertain and hypothetical) suppositions concerning Melville's or
Shakespeare's intent, or the "specific cultural references, etc., meaningful
to the author," are wholly disregarded or receive no preference, the grounds
for calling such things mistakes and cartoonish become much less clear.

If one is dubious of the validity of lending this preference, what allows
him to call such a reading absurd? The answer to this question is not clear
to me, which is why I suggested that a person who -- like me -- will react
negatively to such a reading (and call it a mistake or cartoonish), but
who -- unlike me -- is reluctant to lend the preference you mentioned before
to "specific cultural references, etc., meaningful to the author," this
person needs to puzzle out some of these things in order not to be acting
inconsistently with himself. The reader or critic who does lend such
preference might find interesting and worthwhile thought and discussion in
the subject, but it is not -- at least so it seems to me -- nearly so
pressing to him.

Of course Shakespeare didn't mean homosexual when he said gay. Of course
Melville didn't mean George Bush. Of course these "meanings" were
unavailable to the authors and their original audiences. But if I don't see
facts concerning what the author could have or couldn't have meant as
valuable, if I don't lend preference to "specific cultural references, etc.,
meaningful to the author," then what makes these readings absurd?

-robbie
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Mon Apr 21 20:26:10 2003