Re: Sequels (was Re: Universitatlity)

Reading over your "Odyssey" response, Robbie, I think we're reaching
similar conclusions from different ends of the spectrum, with one or two
differences.

Main thing I want to clarify is that I don't believe the "Odyssey" is a
"dead and empty book." I can see how I left that impression. The main
idea I was trying to communicate was that its long history and cultural
importance lends a weight to it that goes beyond its quality,
sophistication, etc., as a piece of literature evaluated independently
of that history (to the extent that's possible).

I think our real area of disagreement is over what can be "mapped over"
a text, vs. what can be "taken out of it." I think all that we ever do
is "map over" a text. When we say we're "taking X out of a text" (as
opposed to "mapping over"), what I think we're doing is limiting our
reading to the readings possible by the community out of which the work
originally came or, in other words, they way the original readers would
"map over" the text their own experiences and history and ideas (rather
than ours).

Jim

BTW -- from what I understand, the Robin Hood stories originally existed
in the form of sung poems disseminated by traveling bards.
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Sun Dec 14 09:46:04 2003