Re: skip the critic

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Scottie Bowman: "an Easter egg"
• Previous message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Re: Gone Bananafishing. Back Soon."
• Maybe in reply to: WILL HOCHMAN: "skip the critic"
• Next in thread: WILL HOCHMAN: "Re: skip the critic"

> Yup, I think you get it Tim--our list is a form of ongoing criticm IMHO,
> but it's alive in ways most critics aren't.  It may surprise list members
> that I prefer to read our list, but that doesn't mean I want to forget
> about ideas I've experienced from critics so much as see how others
> understand them...refusing to think about good salinger knowledge because
> of where it comes from is one thing I hope to overcome with my project.

I have the sense you're on your way toward that.  This is not always
SCHOLARLY discussion, but occasionally it's interesting to see, say, how
Leslie Fiedler and an "amateur" reader might end up at vastly different
extremes.

Despite its ups and downs, the list does occasionally have life to it that
a critic can use or perhaps learn from.  I agree with you that it's a
strange type of criticism in an decidedly untraditional sense!

--tim

• Next message: Scottie Bowman: "an Easter egg"
• Previous message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Re: Gone Bananafishing. Back Soon."
• Maybe in reply to: WILL HOCHMAN: "skip the critic"
• Next in thread: WILL HOCHMAN: "Re: skip the critic"