My problem, Dr Rovira ...

    '...Is the real problem that people with literary criticism
    its jargon, or simply an unwillingness to really think
    about these issues ...'

    I guess that must be it.

    My 'problem' is that I don't understand much of what you
    write. When I do, I seem continually drawn into a kind
    point-scoring, pseudo-debate where the conditions & terms
    are as defined by you - in ways that sit awkwardly to my own
    way of thinking. It's not exactly jargon but rather a system
    of assumptions shared, presumably, by your colleagues but
    which seem quite alien to my own untrained & doubtless naive
    'common sense'.

    Even I know how treacherous that same 'common sense' can
    sometimes be. But it's much more often the valuable alarm bell
    triggered by bullshit.

    Robbie, on the other hand, though he gives every evidence of
    a scholarly provenance, I find absolutely crystal in his utterances.
    I simply couldn't improve on his remarks to the question of
    Authorial Intent. Yet your only response is to accuse him
    of 'assertions' - implying your own position is somehow attained
    by the loftier steps of pure reason.

    (Though even at this point, you seem more aware of its outdatedness
    & the derisory nature of the eejits who still hold it. I don't want
    to cheat but, as you've acquired the habit of saying: 'I wonder is
    the real problem' already evident in that secret new venue where
    your first request has been for guidance as to what others have
    written on the subject, what might be the good gen ...? Is the need
    greater, perhaps, after all this time in Academia, to fit your responses
    to the currently accepted network of opinion than to consider
    your VERY OWN.)

    Scottie B.

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Thu Oct 24 12:38:19 2002