File spoon-archives/phillitcrit.archive/phillitcrit_1998/phillitcrit.9803, message 36


Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 15:57:24 -0500
Subject: Re: PLC: Online Dark Ages


I agree, when
Gregory {Greg} Downing wrote:
> 
> So once you get past the small number of standard cultural labels and down
> into a certain level of detail in examining things, you end up with a
> culture that exhibits a great degree of variety. Even its "subsets" exhibit
> a certain messiness when you start to generalize about them from up close.
> And on the other hand, things seen as different or opposite end up
> overlapping in significant ways....

	The closer you get to the particulars, the less well tailored are the prepared
concepts in which we clothe them.  But I would disagree with you when you write
...

> 
> But if one wants to root for and against ideologies as others do for and
> against sports franchises, thinking about that is only going to clog things
> up for you, so "don't go there" as they say in ye olde vernac....

	... if by this you mean to say that when one gets down to this level of
particularies one can or should not longer 'root' for or against some literary
theory or praxis.  Indeed, I think that far from "clogging things up," taking a
look at the nitty gritty of, say, Jolly Roger, puts one in a particularly good
position to oppose or support -- root for or against -- it.  In that regard, I
think it rather easy, not difficult, to give reasons for why the positions
espoused by these individuals -- 'conservative' is what they call themselves,
but call them what you will -- are 'wrong-headed'.  
	This isn't to trash everything about their web site, but my comment was only
about their poetics.

Ciao,
Reg


     --- from list phillitcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005