SLSL Intro "Chicago School"

[Dave Monroe]

Well, mostly, I've just been trying to post stuiff
that either came to mind or fell in my lap (speaking
of those Vroom girls ...) as I've been combing and
backcombing and nitpicking and ... these first few
pages of the "Introduction," is all (and I swear, the
next time I post ... well, no, still have things on
pp. 7, 9 and 11 I'd like to annotate, so ...).  Hence,
say, Rorty and Farber, the passages I posted from
which I though particularly appropriate ...

--- Fergus Ginsberg <fergusginsberg at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> The so called political argument school here is
> nothing more than lit-crit. The essays that Dave
> Monroe posted are the thoughts and ideas that the
> "political" school has been presenting here. When
> the so called "lit-critters" argue againt these
> ideas they are attacked on a personal level. The
> politcal is personal?

But I've never quite understood this purported binary
betwixt "the political" and "the literary" here, esp.
as, via a problematic elision or no (or ...), Pynchon
"himself" (and that seems the perennial debate about
the "Intro," does he MEAN it?) hints at the politics
of, the political in, literary language, "an expansion
of possibilities," a "synthesis," in both literary AND
political discourse.   Not that I don't understand
that there has been an academic divide along said
fault line--my professors were largely New Critics,
and that was the avant-garde, whilst my reading was/is
largely postructuralist--but I don't think that
I--among many others here--am so easily placed in one
camp or the other.  (As) If said camps exist at all
here ...

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2