Subject
Re: Fitzgerald in The New Yorker (fwd)
From
Date
Body
From: Brian P Gross <bpg@soco.agilent.com>
> From: Iann88@aol.com
>
> Right on Fitz! I always found it amusing that we teach "modern" literature in
> our colleges when any idiot is capable of understanding the literature of
> their own period. Imagine teaching Fitzgerald!
>
> Phillip Iannarelli
I think the "is capable" is significant.
I don't consider myself an idiot, but I daresay I would not
"understand" artists like Borges, Robbe-Grillet, Eco or Nabokov (for that
matter) without the benefit of some instruction. I'm "capable" of
"understanding" them but wouldn't without help.
I would expect most people to understand writers (Clancy, King) of their
period, but not the artists. After all, isn't art "supposed" to challenge
us?
Brian Gross
ps Happy 4th to my fellow colonists!
> From: Iann88@aol.com
>
> Right on Fitz! I always found it amusing that we teach "modern" literature in
> our colleges when any idiot is capable of understanding the literature of
> their own period. Imagine teaching Fitzgerald!
>
> Phillip Iannarelli
I think the "is capable" is significant.
I don't consider myself an idiot, but I daresay I would not
"understand" artists like Borges, Robbe-Grillet, Eco or Nabokov (for that
matter) without the benefit of some instruction. I'm "capable" of
"understanding" them but wouldn't without help.
I would expect most people to understand writers (Clancy, King) of their
period, but not the artists. After all, isn't art "supposed" to challenge
us?
Brian Gross
ps Happy 4th to my fellow colonists!