Men Explain Lolita To Me

[Mark Kohut]

She's simply wrong in that statement. This is a place where her feminism as a lens which can see better becomes a mistaken projection of a worldview, IMHO.

Sent from my iPad

> On Dec 17, 2015, at 9:21 PM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Solnit praises Lolita and calls it "that masterpiece of Humbert
> Humbert’s failure of empathy". Which someone would Arkansas my work
> that way.
> 
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Charles Albert <cfalbert at gmail.com> wrote:
>> An angry bint with a bludgeon looking to make her bones Arkansasing the
>> justifiably celebrated work of a dead white guy?
>> 
>> Don't see that every day.
>> 
>> If you want a truly stimulating  and exquisitely balanced investigation of
>> the same question I recommend Byatt's Possession.
>> 
>> love,
>> 
>> cfa
>> 
>>> On Dec 17, 2015 8:59 PM, "John Bailey" <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> If you approach pop literary criticism with the same standards you
>>> expect of Kantian philosophy you may end up with a reasonable amount
>>> of stomach trouble.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Tommy Pinecone <endaflynn345 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I had originally extended that message to cover that point but then
>>>> decided
>>>> to take it away.
>>>> 
>>>> To show the weight of thought that needs to go behind a conclusion. Kant
>>>> is
>>>> astoundingly painstaking, as you likely know. That's why I recommended a
>>>> short introduction, the excerpts can be shocking to someone not used to
>>>> it,
>>>> it is an education you are not likely to find anywhere else apart from
>>>> first
>>>> hand in Kant. I could just as easily recommended some of Aristotle's
>>>> work,
>>>> but Kant is more illustrative of the point.
>>>> 
>>>> Wittgenstein's big ideas and posthumous work are constructive in a
>>>> similar
>>>> way.
>>>> 
>>>>> On 18 Dec 2015 01:09, "Danny Weltman" <danny.weltman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> What in Kant's first critique do you find helpful for hitting on "a
>>>>> fast
>>>>> track way to make someone who is uneducated aware of the blatant flaws
>>>>> in
>>>>> certain ideas and movements that are just unsustainable, and somehow
>>>>> having
>>>>> their day the past few years?"
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Tommy Pinecone
>>>>> <endaflynn345 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This is why I make it a deliberate priority not to go on Twitter or to
>>>>>> follow any new intellectual voices.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Every time it is some unfamiliar, alleged authority voicing a loud
>>>>>> opinion that's appointed a flashy title; for some reason Twitter is
>>>>>> frequently mentioned along the way.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I hope the majority of you can see through this pettiness. It's
>>>>>> unfortunate that we are swamped with the hack work and profound
>>>>>> blanketed
>>>>>> hate in modern academia, it is however a fortunate thing that we can
>>>>>> merely
>>>>>> look away and concentrate on human issues instead of coining new
>>>>>> derogatory
>>>>>> terms and stirring up the rabble with a short article.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I often wonder how different these outlooks would be if these people
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> introduced to literature in a different way, free from ideology and
>>>>>> identity-that is an unbiased, philosophical way. I make it a hard
>>>>>> point with
>>>>>> any aspiring student to start off with a short introduction to Kant's
>>>>>> primary Critique and a short introduction to Wittgenstein's thought;
>>>>>> no
>>>>>> doubt it is an anomalous approach, but it's a fast track way to make
>>>>>> someone
>>>>>> who is uneducated aware of the blatant flaws in certain ideas and
>>>>>> movements
>>>>>> that are just unsustainable, and somehow having their day the past few
>>>>>> years.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We shouldn't have to pause to think of these things when there are
>>>>>> bigger
>>>>>> issues than female characters not being put in the center of the
>>>>>> stage. What
>>>>>> if I wanted to pen an article on how I wasn't happy with the lack of
>>>>>> empathy
>>>>>> Beckett shows in all of his works, to individuals of both genders no
>>>>>> less?
>>>>>> Sure, the circumstances are different here, but not dramatically. It's
>>>>>> simply absurd. I struggle to believe these type of things when I see
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> being taken so seriously by so many. Makes one feel hopeless,
>>>>>> especially
>>>>>> when these are still the early years of the internet and the loudest
>>>>>> voices
>>>>>> are reaching aspiring students through social media poisoning their
>>>>>> nascent
>>>>>> opinions and thoughts.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 17 Dec 2015 20:51, "Matthew Taylor" <matthew.taylor923 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thoughts on Rebecca Solnit's latest?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://lithub.com/men-explain-lolita-to-me/
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l