crushed

    I expect I've got this wrong, but I insofar as I do understand
    him, John refuses to judge one work of art as having an intrinsic
    worth greater or less than another's - other than the purely local,
    personal, provisional. He says his objection to my example
    of Fascist writing was founded on 'completely different' grounds.
    Different from what, I wonder? Aesthetic I guess, although I have
    only the vaguest idea what is meant by the word.

    But, as he would say, it's not really important to me what he might
    mean. (I'm not too desperate for another load of Frenchified word-
    wanking). What does matter - a little - is how it comes about that
    someone who so casually disdains the idea of worth should, by
    the depth of his erudition, the acerbity of his wit, the fluency of
    his writing, the effortlessness of his bricolage, leave me with such
    a sinking sense of my own worthlessness.

    It DOES seem ironic - not to say unfair.

    Scottie B.

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Sat Dec 20 05:50:41 2003