RE: The World According to Walter

There is a general reader, the reader who reads for enjoyment and looks for
meaning and intent without looking for theories. Who use the assumptions of
their everyday communication skills to understand. Apart from Professors
and grad students etc all the readers prior to this list that I have
discussed literature with fit this definition.

I guess its our business when we get berated for being 'ignorant' as if
without formal Literary education we can never understand Literature or what
we do understand is simple or basic and we can't bother them, "go read your
cliff notes."

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Kozusko [mailto:mkozusko@parallel.park.uga.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 5:46 PM
To: bananafish@roughdraft.org
Subject: The World According to Walter

By Walter's definition, the academician inhabits his own world, in which
he is expected to communicate ideas about his "narrow focus." Unlike
real people with careers in the real world outside academia,
communication in academia generally need not involve anyone outside a
particular narrow focus (except, of course, when academics have to
teach, in which case Walter's definition of them seems to change--or so
it seems to me, from here, within the cozy confines of my own narrow
academic focus. I am left to suppose that if I weren't an academician,
and that if I enjoyed a real career in the real world, Walter's
articulated concept would make sense to me as a member of that magical
"wide range of peole" out there. But that's another post. Back to the
point). And so I have to wonder: if academics aren't required to make
sense to the outside world, what business would the outside world have
criticizing academics for not making sense?
 

--
Il n'y a pas de hors texte,
Matt
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH