Literature is still powerful stuff

[malignd at aol.com]

Jerry Lewis lays claim to coining this phrase.


And, as Bevis and Butthead sey, ya can't polish a turd. 






-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es>
To: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>; pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Fri, Apr 26, 2013 5:30 am
Subject: Re: Literature is still powerful stuff



Ahh, the question of taste and distinction, now we move closer to the sociology of taste. From whence these categories and criteria that "support our claim"? Some very interesting work is being done in this area. Through this approach we can come to a better understanding of canonicity and aesthetics, for example the work done by John Guillory.


ciao
mc


  
 
 
 
   From: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
 To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
 Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:57 AM
 Subject: Re: Literature is still powerful stuff
  
 



Rich, 


You read lots of books. Some are better than others. Other than your personal preferences, why are some better than others? Why do people who study literature, people like Wood, people like Bloom, agree that some works are better than most? When I read a Run DMC "poem" about poetry, like this one here, a lyric that has been anthologies, I know why it is not equal to or even close to a Keats poem about poetry, like this one here. It's not preference, but criteria that support my claim. As a carpenter, I know a solid structure from a house that Jack built. As musician, I know Mozart from Michael Jackson. Of course, this last one is an unfair one because MJ is a pop music star and Mozart is not. Still, we know that Mozart is a musician on a whole not her level. Leveling doesn't prevent labeling. And, as Bevis and Butthead sey, ya can't polish a turd. 




http://rapgenius.com/Run-dmc-peter-piper-lyrics#note-100085





http://poetry.about.com/od/poems/l/blkeatsonsonnet.htm


On Thursday, April 25, 2013, rich  wrote:

M--

my point was not that literature is crap, just that you can't define
it via a certain set of criteria/assumptions/insights, what have you.
maybe i should have said literature just is. I don't like planting
labels on things thats all.

Im just an averge guy Im not as well-versed as alice or others here. I
just read the books (or try to).


On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es> wrote:
> Rich,
>
> You say that literature is nothing, surely you can't mean this, otherwise why would you be here commenting on literature. Literarture may be a cultural product and all the pomp and play that surround it no more than one of the games we play, but make no mistake, literature is powerful stuff. Ask Rushdie, go ask Orwell's ghost. You don't think Tom Clancy novels are as important as western movies for understanding a certain segment of U.S ideology? Do you think Ernst Jünger's 1924 edition of Storms of Steel didn't contribute to the rise of german fascism as much as economics and other factors?
>
> As for Wood's attempt to distinguish between the good and the bad, and convince us of that distinction, he is only doing what he must to establish his position and garner the capital and prestige that will make him a dominant agent within the dominated section of the social field. OF course he doesn't recognise it as such, but who does?
>
> Envy him? Well, the job doesn't sound bad, but no I don't envy him. Have you read his essay on Harold Bloom? Jimmy didn't learn from Harold. Like that elder critic, whom Wood aims to dethrone, Wood wrote a book that apparently made him look like he didn't know so much about what makes good literature; I bet he wishes he could make that book disappear sometimes, just like Bloom. The danger of critics trying to write fiction.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
> To: Markekohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Bekah <bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net>; Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es>; "pynchon-l at waste.org" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Modern world and paranoia
>
>
> why wood and company need to make such distinctions is beyond me. I
> guess thats where is bread is buttered, to have "opinions" and how
> awful that must be over time. I dont envy him one bit. Literature isnt
> anything.
>





 
 
  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130426/0c6e799f/attachment.html>