GENTLE READERS: I'M ABOUT TO MOVE INTO A PERIOD OF EXAMINATIONS FOLLOWED BY FAIRLY HEAVY RESEARCH, AND I'M PUTTING THE BLOG ON HIATUS FOR THREE MONTHS. I'LL BE BACK ON THE FIFTH DAY OF THE NEW YEAR TO CHART FURTHER THE HUMAN RACE'S DESCENT INTO BARBARISM -- UNTIL THEN, THANKS FOR READING.
MEANWHILE, ENJOY THE BEST AND WORST OF 2012:
NABOKOV - LOLITA
"I, personally, do no not think that Humbert Humbert's act of giving Lolita sleeping pills is justified, but with a closer analysis, this act can be justified. Humbert Humbert gives Lolita these pills so he can molest her, and Lolita would have no knowledge of it. This can be considered a justified act because this shows that Humbert Humbert cares about the Lolita's sanity and well-being. Who knows what Lolita would think if Humbert Humbert forcefully rape her. Her behavior can show signs of insanity or she can experience unstable conditions. Humbert Humbert is looking out for her well-being by giving her the sleeping pills with the intent of raping her."
CERVANTES - DON QUIXOTE
"What the hell is the big deal about Don Quixote?
And not knowing that he was the master of Sancho Panza? People are shrieking everywhere, OH MY GOD!!!!! U MUST BE TEH ILLITERATEZ IF U DO NOT KNOW WHO HE IS! Jesus, get over your ego-centric westernized world views."
JOYCE - ULYSSES
"Proclaiming this the greatest novel of the 20th century is arguably correct for the technical structure, language use, observation etc but that is like stating Citizen Kane as the greatest film - technically brilliant but does anyone really enjoy or even truely understand it?"
WILLIAM JAMES - THE VARIETIES OF RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE
"I have a degree and some background in psychology, but I couldn't understand a word of what James Joyce was saying or trying to say, it's so 'thick', and that's unfortunately the way a lot of the top 100 greatest novels read for me; like Ulysses for example. That book was so thick with aulde Englishe, one would need an interpreter or something. My only thought is, what a bunch of stuffy people, those literary 'scholars', who voted many of these books. I am reading all the way through the bible, my objective, but I am also reading and enjoying many of the greatest classic novels as an objective, just to do it. But I don't need to read this book 'varieties..' to gain a single grain of wisdom or whatever. I am a born-again God-Man with a most wonderful life experience. Handcuffed in a police car and at the breaking point, I silently cried out from someplace desperately deep inside, 'O God... Take me out of this world', and true to my prayer, God answered. One day hitchhiking, I met a household of 'brothers' headed by a middle-aged Japanese couple. The Japanese man asked me, 'If you could have a treasure chest, that every time you opened it, there was something new and [exciting], would you take it?' When I looked into his eyes, they were shining, not as if he had been weeping, but glistening as with life and joy. I didn't answer; in fact I put up a fighting argument the whole time, but I stepped out to the curb, and whispered, 'Lord Jesus Christ! If you are real, get me a ride.' Almost instantly, a VW bug pulled over with a young college music student inside and took me home. Another day, I tested again, '.. If you're real, please give me a ride.' A car again pulled over, I got in without saying a word, and the lady handed me some christian gospel tracts, '..Here. Hand these out to people you meet. Praise the Lord.' Again another day, I tested, 'Lord, if you're real..' I got in without saying a word, and the lady exclaimed, '..I just had to pick you up. God told me, 'Pick up my Child'...'"
SHAKESPEARE - HAMLET
"Would've been a good book if the play was revolved around Laertes instead of Hamlet. It would've been based on the same timeline but just from Laertes's point of view. Think about it."
DOSTOEVSKY - CRIME AND PUNISHMENT
"Lessons this book teaches us: 'You are not superiour to other people, do not kill other people, God is the answer to all your problems'
Good. now let's go after some teletabbies."
EMERSON - ESSAYS
"This book was a waste of my time. Not anywhere in his bumbling incoherence did Waldo come up with a single cognitive thought! The shame he has brought upon American society is very disturbing. I mean, his name is WALDO. You know? As in, where's Waldo? Obviously he's very lost. Stay away!"
BEOWULF
"I continue to be amazed at the belief that just because something is written by the British then that in itself makes it a classic and a must read. We freed ourselves from the British government through war and struggle. What do we have to do to free ourselves from their literature, becuase other than The Cantebury Tales and a few poems and epitaphs, British lit is long, boring, tedious and outdated. Not to mention some of the language is unbearable, I find myself having to re-read passages just to understand them. Please free the college undergrads of the world."
KUHN - THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS
"Kuhn started down this path by looking at Aristotle's physics and asked why something that was so 'obviously' wrong could have been conceived by such a brilliant man and not be questioned for such a long time. The obvious answer to anyone with a grasp of history would be that Aristotle wasn't all that smart"
HENRY JAMES - THE TURN OF THE SCREW
"Many people will say: 'you can't judge a 19th-century book according to our 21th century standards'. Good point, but yes, I can."
KIERKEGAARD - REPETITION
"Philosophers are people who like to make life seem more meaningful than it is. We live. We die. End of transaction."
SOPHOCLES - OEDIPUS AT COLONUS
"too simplistic for me ... I expected to be challenged when reading Sophocles. I'm guessing that this was written at a middle school reading level."
NABOKOV - BEND SINISTER
"Pubescent girls have all the features that heterosexual men normally find attractive, including an extra dose of youthfulness. Show me a man, white gentile or otherwise, who does not find them attractive and I will show you a probable homosexual."
HAWTHORNE - THE SCARLET LETTER
"I read this book as part of my background reading on the Gothic for my A level exams, and it left me asking two questions when I'd finished, first, how is this even slightly Gothic?"
LADY MURASAKI - THE TALE OF GENJI
"it gave me headaches from all the words and whatnot. It's like they think i know ALL these stuff."
ARISTOTLE - PHYSICS
"Forget Plato. Forget Aristotle. What about that philosopher know as 'you'?"
"ARISTOTLE WAS AN IDIOT
Aristotelian logic is destroying our world. The world must stop adhering to this old style of logic and begin viewing all things as One if the human race is to survive for any decent length of time.
The way to sidestep around this trap of Aristotle is to see all things as One, with no particular leanings to either end of the pole. Be in the middle. Walk the middle path between the extremes. Observe with a scientific mind all that occurs before you in life."
SHAKESPEARE - A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM
"i thought this book was stupid and kinda confusing... its a play and they do a play within a play, um no its just not gonna work out. its a stupid book because there are 3 worlds, none that would ever really be around, and faries are just no longer popular. so if shakesphere was actually a good writer then sure, but this book is just weird."
BERKELEY - THREE DIALOGUES BETWEEN HYLAS AND PHILONOUS
"George Berkeley is an exemplary example of why philosophers are known as crazy ... Claiming that there is no matter and everything we see is perception is unlikely to get you any brownie points."
THE BIBLE
"There's some comedy pieces like this guy Noah who forgot all the dinosaurs and left them to die instead of taking them on his super arc. Must have been a cold-hearted guy and let them drown like the chick in Titanic did to Leo. So did Noah paint the dinosaurs like one of his 'French girls'? ... I think the writers owe George Lucas some money for stealing his idea."
O'CONNOR - A GOOD MAN IS HARD TO FIND
"I wouldn't recommend this book. I picked it up thinking it would give me a great story about a certain man in this world . . . and it squelched my hopes. I have a husband I love dearly and hardly get to see. When I do, I want to appreciate him more vs. find myself dwelling on the negative. This book was not positive and was a waste of my time I felt."
SHELLEY - EPIPSYCHIDION
"Percy Bitch Shelley (4 August 1792 – 8 July 1822), one of the faggot English Romantic poets and, critically regarded as among the gayest lyric poets in the English language"
DANTE - THE DIVINE COMEDY
"Would Not Make It In Today's World
One of those classics that would not make it in today's world. There are some humorous parts, but the America is so over the edge with its shock culture, such as shock rock, and shock news that it makes this book seem quite dated."
HUME - A TREATISE OF HUMAN NATURE
"i hate Hume, Locke, Galileo, Pascal, Kant, Hegel, and all those stupid philosophers that just liked to smoke a lot of pot and write shit that we have to study like crazy!!"
HEMINGWAY - A FAREWELL TO ARMS
"This novel reminds me of those rooms with one chair (wooden) and one window (no curtains) which we're supposed to appreciate."
TOLSTOY - ANNA KARENINA
"Almost every night, my husband comes to bed and finds me passed out with a book open and my glasses still on my face. He gently removes the glasses, pulls the book away and sets them both on the nightstand. Last night, he picks up Anna Karenina and the following conversation ensues:
Him - 'That's a big book! Have you really read 500 pages?'
I reply in a sleepy voice, 'yeah. it sucks.'
Him - 'It looks boring as fuck.'
Me - sleepy giggle
He says, 'It looks like some romance/wuthering heights bullshit. You, know, 'stuffy.' In his best uppity Victorian voice, says, 'Anna gets banged in the garden by some honeysuckle.'
Me - cracking up
Him - 'Who wrote that?'
Me - 'Tolstoy'
Together, at the same time, we say, 'War and Peace'
Him - 'Dude is obviously one long-winded motherfucker!'
Me - laughing hysterically. (he has made a valid point!)"
HURSTON - THEIR EYES WERE WATCHING GOD
"Am I biased? Yes, completely, I think that the work of women does not compare favorably to what men have achieved in letters ... But there is the converse....I mean, how many great wives, how many good stay-at-home moms have been men?"
HORACE - ARS POETICA
"Its odd that for the first time physics reflects actual life philosophy (not the college coarse you took to have it look good on your transcripts), and yet people are still hung up on these order systems like morality.
Morality is dead.
Nihilism is dead.
Ethic is dead.
And this is all so obvious with QM and string theory, yet yuppie college grads are so presistent with their dead greeks ... Horace was an idiot people, and it would be best to read him to learn to hate him better."
SALINGER - THE CATCHER IN THE RYE
"I am very open minded when it comes to literature (I even read through Mein Kampf without any objection) but I just hated this book!"
WEBER - THE PROTESTANT ETHIC AND THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM
"The idea that God brings you economic success (and by extension an omnipresent repression of success for others) is because you are part of his 'elite.' It's a Calvinist principle. They believe in predestination, so basically if you are doing well, it's because God wants you to and that makes it okay. Max Weber actually supported that ridiculous belief in his book."
BALDWIN - GO TELL IT ON THE MOUNTAIN
"Maybe this book just was not right for me, but I really would not recommend this to anyone who has a cheerful personality. The reader has to enjoy thinking about and pondering ideas in a book"
AUSTEN - PRIDE AND PREJUDICE
"Ohmigod, have I mentioned that I hate Jane Austen?!? I really, really hate Jane Austen. It took me a year to make it through this book. So much talking about nothing. So much of nothing happening in general. Someone enters a room, someone leaves a room.
A couple of notable scenes: Elizabeth Bennett's snappy comments when Darcy slights her and Darcy's lovelorn letter. Guess what? Both are just as good in films. Honestly, even though I teach English, I firmly believe every Jane Austen book makes for a better movie."
MACHIAVELLI - THE PRINCE
"Niccolò Machiavelli was a Big Fat Idiot
Machiavelli's The Prince is a piece of filth. Everything that is wrong in the world today can be directly attributed to this atrocity.
Take, for instance, crime. The basic mentality of most criminals is that crime pays for them, so long as they do not get caught. This philosophy is remarkably similar to that of Machiavelli, and is most likely derived from his work. Machiavelli taught that the end justifies the means. This can be easily interpreted as an encouragement of crime, so much as the criminal was benefiting from the crime he was committing. Criminals thought it was a good deed to murder, steal, loot, pillage, and rape; they perceived themself as making other people proud by vandalizing and slaughtering animals. Without Machiavelli's philosophies, criminals would not feel that they themselves were justified in their actions and all crime today would have been averted.
...
Further evidence of the threat of The Prince is prejudice. The basis for all prejudice is Machiavelli. At one point in his work, he refers to being 'effeminate' as a bad quality, synonymous with being cowardice. Thus, he advocated the belief that men were superior to women. Followers of Machiavelli soon took this belief and expanded it to include all that are not biologically similar to them as being inferior. Before long, people would run down streets, screaming in ignorance, claiming that the star-bellied sneeches or what have you were not true sentient beings, reducing others and themselves to sub-animal status and thus commencing the demise of human civilization.
...
In addition, the work of Machiavelli is the sole cause of poverty. Machiavelli encouraged the rich to keep all their money to themselves; he claimed it was better to be miserly than generous. As a result of this, the gap between the upper and lower classes was increased on both ends. The rich continued to become more lavish and extravagant, shoving their fine coats and money in the faces of the poor, while the poor, cut off from all the donations they would have received, became more miserable, and started smashing stuff in rage. However, since Machiavelli advocated the idea of being feared rather than loved, the upper class thrived off the lower classes fear that they would be slain mercilessly rather than showing love by helping eliminate poverty."
MELVILLE - MOBY-DICK
"Moby Dick is actually a bit of a joke in literary circles. It is poorly written, and it likely would not be published today if it weren’t for its reputation."
ELLISON - INVISIBLE MAN
"I believe this novel was also written as a narrative, retaining the overall quality found within a narration. The author displayed the style of writing with historical accuracy and radical development. Done in a narrative style with a strong sense of time and place, Ellison was aware of his ideas and character's growth throughout the novel. I strongly believe that Ellison was aware of this theme. He displayed it accurately throughout."
Monday, October 1, 2012
Sunday, September 30, 2012
THE BEST OF SEPTEMBER
HAWTHORNE - YOUNG GOODMAN BROWN
"Blasphemy against the true woodsman
This short tale, like many of the effervescent Hawthorne's works, exposes the general contempt that dutiful professionals of urbana have against the farmer. Here, a charming young man is afraid to explore the limits of his soul, who must venture the forest to retrieve a lost treasure, but will not, would not all his spirit to traverse the darkened elements.
Several generations of good language arts teacher, of the secondary caliber, are subverting their classes with this work. They had been seduced by the charms of this Harvard-graduates eloquence. Unknowing the true interests of the youth, our cultural shame is that nearby along the shelves is a book written by his neighbour called Walden.
It would benefit the 7th grader to read Thoreau than more than having his teacher's fantasies insinuated through this other work."
SHAKESPEARE - MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING
"I did not like this book very much. There was a lot of conflict between characters."
MACHIAVELLI - THE PRINCE
"Niccolò Machiavelli was a Big Fat Idiot
Machiavelli's The Prince is a piece of filth. Everything that is wrong in the world today can be directly attributed to this atrocity.
Take, for instance, crime. The basic mentality of most criminals is that crime pays for them, so long as they do not get caught. This philosophy is remarkably similar to that of Machiavelli, and is most likely derived from his work. Machiavelli taught that the end justifies the means. This can be easily interpreted as an encouragement of crime, so much as the criminal was benefiting from the crime he was committing. Criminals thought it was a good deed to murder, steal, loot, pillage, and rape; they perceived themself as making other people proud by vandalizing and slaughtering animals. Without Machiavelli's philosophies, criminals would not feel that they themselves were justified in their actions and all crime today would have been averted.
...
Further evidence of the threat of The Prince is prejudice. The basis for all prejudice is Machiavelli. At one point in his work, he refers to being 'effeminate' as a bad quality, synonymous with being cowardice. Thus, he advocated the belief that men were superior to women. Followers of Machiavelli soon took this belief and expanded it to include all that are not biologically similar to them as being inferior. Before long, people would run down streets, screaming in ignorance, claiming that the star-bellied sneeches or what have you were not true sentient beings, reducing others and themselves to sub-animal status and thus commencing the demise of human civilization.
...
In addition, the work of Machiavelli is the sole cause of poverty. Machiavelli encouraged the rich to keep all their money to themselves; he claimed it was better to be miserly than generous. As a result of this, the gap between the upper and lower classes was increased on both ends. The rich continued to become more lavish and extravagant, shoving their fine coats and money in the faces of the poor, while the poor, cut off from all the donations they would have received, became more miserable, and started smashing stuff in rage. However, since Machiavelli advocated the idea of being feared rather than loved, the upper class thrived off the lower classes fear that they would be slain mercilessly rather than showing love by helping eliminate poverty."
MELVILLE - MOBY-DICK
"Moby Dick is actually a bit of a joke in literary circles. It is poorly written, and it likely would not be published today if it weren’t for its reputation."
ELLISON - INVISIBLE MAN
"A seminal work in 'race relations' -- a genre that should have been banished to idiocy (along with religion and the death penalty) years ago. What I mean by that is this: there is no such thing as 'race,' and people should realize we are all just *people* and move the hell on."
"The only think this book is about is how black people were treated so badly, I don't feel bad for them because they didn't try to change it."
"I believe this novel was also written as a narrative, retaining the overall quality found within a narration. The author displayed the style of writing with historical accuracy and radical development. Done in a narrative style with a strong sense of time and place, Ellison was aware of his ideas and character's growth throughout the novel. I strongly believe that Ellison was aware of this theme. He displayed it accurately throughout."
FAULKNER - AS I LAY DYING
"makes me cry and shit myself."
CICERO - ORATIONS
"Greeks and Romans were idiots ... Pretty much there's the Greek gods, Zeus and all this other stuff. And pretty much all they do is run around on top of mountains zapping each other with lightning bolts and throwing spears at each other. I mean... really? Not very creative, first of all. Pretty much all they did was bad things, they killed, they tormented, they hurt each other, and it's like what kind of God would want to do that? ... It's stupid. And then the Romans, they're like the kid at school who goes up to the person who always gets Fs and cheats off their test except for changing it just a little bit so that the teacher won't think they're copying. It's like seriously they just take the gods pretty much and just change the names ... And then they copied their architecture, they copied everything. They're so similar. They're so similar that I confuse the Greeks and Romans like every day.
...
It's like what would cause these guys to think of all this? Well, the main cause that I would think of is maybe they're totally insane. Maybe they're just plain idiots.
...
And sure, they might have been smart in like math, but who gives a crap about math? I mean, knowing the basics is good, you need to know the basics, but for a lot of things you're not going to need to know the Pythagorean theorem. Or any confusing stuff. It's like sure maybe it's nice to know, but there's a lot of stuff that's a lot more important than math. It's like, they were frickin... I'm not going to say the words I was going to say. They were idiots, though. They are not smart."
"Blasphemy against the true woodsman
This short tale, like many of the effervescent Hawthorne's works, exposes the general contempt that dutiful professionals of urbana have against the farmer. Here, a charming young man is afraid to explore the limits of his soul, who must venture the forest to retrieve a lost treasure, but will not, would not all his spirit to traverse the darkened elements.
Several generations of good language arts teacher, of the secondary caliber, are subverting their classes with this work. They had been seduced by the charms of this Harvard-graduates eloquence. Unknowing the true interests of the youth, our cultural shame is that nearby along the shelves is a book written by his neighbour called Walden.
It would benefit the 7th grader to read Thoreau than more than having his teacher's fantasies insinuated through this other work."
SHAKESPEARE - MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING
"I did not like this book very much. There was a lot of conflict between characters."
MACHIAVELLI - THE PRINCE
"Niccolò Machiavelli was a Big Fat Idiot
Machiavelli's The Prince is a piece of filth. Everything that is wrong in the world today can be directly attributed to this atrocity.
Take, for instance, crime. The basic mentality of most criminals is that crime pays for them, so long as they do not get caught. This philosophy is remarkably similar to that of Machiavelli, and is most likely derived from his work. Machiavelli taught that the end justifies the means. This can be easily interpreted as an encouragement of crime, so much as the criminal was benefiting from the crime he was committing. Criminals thought it was a good deed to murder, steal, loot, pillage, and rape; they perceived themself as making other people proud by vandalizing and slaughtering animals. Without Machiavelli's philosophies, criminals would not feel that they themselves were justified in their actions and all crime today would have been averted.
...
Further evidence of the threat of The Prince is prejudice. The basis for all prejudice is Machiavelli. At one point in his work, he refers to being 'effeminate' as a bad quality, synonymous with being cowardice. Thus, he advocated the belief that men were superior to women. Followers of Machiavelli soon took this belief and expanded it to include all that are not biologically similar to them as being inferior. Before long, people would run down streets, screaming in ignorance, claiming that the star-bellied sneeches or what have you were not true sentient beings, reducing others and themselves to sub-animal status and thus commencing the demise of human civilization.
...
In addition, the work of Machiavelli is the sole cause of poverty. Machiavelli encouraged the rich to keep all their money to themselves; he claimed it was better to be miserly than generous. As a result of this, the gap between the upper and lower classes was increased on both ends. The rich continued to become more lavish and extravagant, shoving their fine coats and money in the faces of the poor, while the poor, cut off from all the donations they would have received, became more miserable, and started smashing stuff in rage. However, since Machiavelli advocated the idea of being feared rather than loved, the upper class thrived off the lower classes fear that they would be slain mercilessly rather than showing love by helping eliminate poverty."
MELVILLE - MOBY-DICK
"Moby Dick is actually a bit of a joke in literary circles. It is poorly written, and it likely would not be published today if it weren’t for its reputation."
ELLISON - INVISIBLE MAN
"A seminal work in 'race relations' -- a genre that should have been banished to idiocy (along with religion and the death penalty) years ago. What I mean by that is this: there is no such thing as 'race,' and people should realize we are all just *people* and move the hell on."
"The only think this book is about is how black people were treated so badly, I don't feel bad for them because they didn't try to change it."
"I believe this novel was also written as a narrative, retaining the overall quality found within a narration. The author displayed the style of writing with historical accuracy and radical development. Done in a narrative style with a strong sense of time and place, Ellison was aware of his ideas and character's growth throughout the novel. I strongly believe that Ellison was aware of this theme. He displayed it accurately throughout."
FAULKNER - AS I LAY DYING
"makes me cry and shit myself."
CICERO - ORATIONS
"Greeks and Romans were idiots ... Pretty much there's the Greek gods, Zeus and all this other stuff. And pretty much all they do is run around on top of mountains zapping each other with lightning bolts and throwing spears at each other. I mean... really? Not very creative, first of all. Pretty much all they did was bad things, they killed, they tormented, they hurt each other, and it's like what kind of God would want to do that? ... It's stupid. And then the Romans, they're like the kid at school who goes up to the person who always gets Fs and cheats off their test except for changing it just a little bit so that the teacher won't think they're copying. It's like seriously they just take the gods pretty much and just change the names ... And then they copied their architecture, they copied everything. They're so similar. They're so similar that I confuse the Greeks and Romans like every day.
...
It's like what would cause these guys to think of all this? Well, the main cause that I would think of is maybe they're totally insane. Maybe they're just plain idiots.
...
And sure, they might have been smart in like math, but who gives a crap about math? I mean, knowing the basics is good, you need to know the basics, but for a lot of things you're not going to need to know the Pythagorean theorem. Or any confusing stuff. It's like sure maybe it's nice to know, but there's a lot of stuff that's a lot more important than math. It's like, they were frickin... I'm not going to say the words I was going to say. They were idiots, though. They are not smart."
Saturday, September 29, 2012
Cicero - Orations
"I really… really… really want to stab Cicero straight in the freaking testicles."
"THERE’S A REASON WHY THIS LANGUAGE IS DEAD
IT SHOULD NOT BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS WOESIDFLJK"
"Oh, the times! Oh, the morals! Oh, 300 more pages of this!"
"Greeks and Romans were idiots ... Pretty much there's the Greek gods, Zeus and all this other stuff. And pretty much all they do is run around on top of mountains zapping each other with lightning bolts and throwing spears at each other. I mean... really? Not very creative, first of all. Pretty much all they did was bad things, they killed, they tormented, they hurt each other, and it's like what kind of God would want to do that? ... It's stupid. And then the Romans, they're like the kid at school who goes up to the person who always gets Fs and cheats off their test except for changing it just a little bit so that the teacher won't think they're copying. It's like seriously they just take the gods pretty much and just change the names ... And then they copied their architecture, they copied everything. They're so similar. They're so similar that I confuse the Greeks and Romans like every day.
...
It's like what would cause these guys to think of all this? Well, the main cause that I would think of is maybe they're totally insane. Maybe they're just plain idiots.
...
And sure, they might have been smart in like math, but who gives a crap about math? I mean, knowing the basics is good, you need to know the basics, but for a lot of things you're not going to need to know the Pythagorean theorem. Or any confusing stuff. It's like sure maybe it's nice to know, but there's a lot of stuff that's a lot more important than math. It's like, they were frickin... I'm not going to say the words I was going to say. They were idiots, though. They are not smart."
"THERE’S A REASON WHY THIS LANGUAGE IS DEAD
IT SHOULD NOT BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS WOESIDFLJK"
"Oh, the times! Oh, the morals! Oh, 300 more pages of this!"
"Greeks and Romans were idiots ... Pretty much there's the Greek gods, Zeus and all this other stuff. And pretty much all they do is run around on top of mountains zapping each other with lightning bolts and throwing spears at each other. I mean... really? Not very creative, first of all. Pretty much all they did was bad things, they killed, they tormented, they hurt each other, and it's like what kind of God would want to do that? ... It's stupid. And then the Romans, they're like the kid at school who goes up to the person who always gets Fs and cheats off their test except for changing it just a little bit so that the teacher won't think they're copying. It's like seriously they just take the gods pretty much and just change the names ... And then they copied their architecture, they copied everything. They're so similar. They're so similar that I confuse the Greeks and Romans like every day.
...
It's like what would cause these guys to think of all this? Well, the main cause that I would think of is maybe they're totally insane. Maybe they're just plain idiots.
...
And sure, they might have been smart in like math, but who gives a crap about math? I mean, knowing the basics is good, you need to know the basics, but for a lot of things you're not going to need to know the Pythagorean theorem. Or any confusing stuff. It's like sure maybe it's nice to know, but there's a lot of stuff that's a lot more important than math. It's like, they were frickin... I'm not going to say the words I was going to say. They were idiots, though. They are not smart."
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying III
"The most horrifying, awful reading experience I've ever had."
"makes me cry and shit myself."
"As I Lay Dying by Faulkner. I had a tough time understanding the backwards language of these backwoods people. It was much ado over nothing much ... I could make it out to be much more as many people have but I wouldn’t recommend this book - nothing is to be learned from it today, other perhaps than in his style of writing, which I don’t really care for since I’m a reader and not a writer; however, times were different in 1930 when it was published and it may have been shocking for some then."
"I give this one star, simply because the end was mildly interesting. However, the title of this book has been changed within my house. It is now called As I Lay Dying (Of Boredom)."
"I found it hardly entertaining and I didn't appreciate the 'it's all jumbled and when you're done you're suppose to sit back and think on it forming it logically in your mind' I don't find that amusing. If you write a book I should only do % 25 of the work with is reading what you wrote and understanding all the images because you put them there for me to understand."
"As I Lay Dying was old and static-y. This caused me to miss many pages. Even if I would have read every page i'm not sure if I would have gotten everything. Honestly, there is a point where you are being so dense and mysterious that you are just wasting the readers time."
"I read this book for college and I hated it so much and I was so depressed from reading it that, with only a few days left, I chose a whole other novel rather than write an essay on this book. I don't think I have read anything more depressing than this book, and as a former English major that is saying something."
"I teach literature at university level and I am astounded how this book finds its way onto numerous 'must read' lists that appear on the internet and periodically in print ... How ever you spin it, what ultimately transpires is that for any of the above reasons or others equally illogical, perfectly good texts - especially modern ones, are constantly ignored as white elephants like this go through their umpteenth re-print.
To get down to brass tacks, this book fails for a number of reasons, but amongst those I would cite the following five as being the major points of contention:
i) It is simply VERY boring indeed. A dull tale if ever one was told.
ii) The characters are neither well-established or particularly well-drawn. Faulkner's literary skills presented herein are neither worthy of his acclaim nor his many accolades and awards.
iii) Structurally it is a simple narrative (not necessarily a problem), however, his language (except the odd regional accent) is unchallenging and unprovocative.
iv) It essentially fails to offer the reader anything. No new ideas, no philosophical insights, no social observations and no historical documentary per se. I think I picked out and highlighted about four sentences in the whole book, that I felt were interesting.
v) Finally, it fails to establish a new genre, a new mode of expression. Likewise it also fails to re-establish a current mode or extend and develop a literary style. In plain terms that means it belongs nowhere, has no recognisable nor definable style and yet fails to take new steps in establish a new genre; it is amateurish and unaccomplished.
...
I cannot see one logical or justifiable reason why anyone should waste their time or their money in reading this text. Unless it is prescribed reading, in which case I would question the teachers motivations for electing this a a core or supplementary text. I think if you are studying American Literature, literature of death and dying, family structures etc. there are MUCH better books out there than this."
"makes me cry and shit myself."
"As I Lay Dying by Faulkner. I had a tough time understanding the backwards language of these backwoods people. It was much ado over nothing much ... I could make it out to be much more as many people have but I wouldn’t recommend this book - nothing is to be learned from it today, other perhaps than in his style of writing, which I don’t really care for since I’m a reader and not a writer; however, times were different in 1930 when it was published and it may have been shocking for some then."
"I give this one star, simply because the end was mildly interesting. However, the title of this book has been changed within my house. It is now called As I Lay Dying (Of Boredom)."
"I found it hardly entertaining and I didn't appreciate the 'it's all jumbled and when you're done you're suppose to sit back and think on it forming it logically in your mind' I don't find that amusing. If you write a book I should only do % 25 of the work with is reading what you wrote and understanding all the images because you put them there for me to understand."
"As I Lay Dying was old and static-y. This caused me to miss many pages. Even if I would have read every page i'm not sure if I would have gotten everything. Honestly, there is a point where you are being so dense and mysterious that you are just wasting the readers time."
"I read this book for college and I hated it so much and I was so depressed from reading it that, with only a few days left, I chose a whole other novel rather than write an essay on this book. I don't think I have read anything more depressing than this book, and as a former English major that is saying something."
"I teach literature at university level and I am astounded how this book finds its way onto numerous 'must read' lists that appear on the internet and periodically in print ... How ever you spin it, what ultimately transpires is that for any of the above reasons or others equally illogical, perfectly good texts - especially modern ones, are constantly ignored as white elephants like this go through their umpteenth re-print.
To get down to brass tacks, this book fails for a number of reasons, but amongst those I would cite the following five as being the major points of contention:
i) It is simply VERY boring indeed. A dull tale if ever one was told.
ii) The characters are neither well-established or particularly well-drawn. Faulkner's literary skills presented herein are neither worthy of his acclaim nor his many accolades and awards.
iii) Structurally it is a simple narrative (not necessarily a problem), however, his language (except the odd regional accent) is unchallenging and unprovocative.
iv) It essentially fails to offer the reader anything. No new ideas, no philosophical insights, no social observations and no historical documentary per se. I think I picked out and highlighted about four sentences in the whole book, that I felt were interesting.
v) Finally, it fails to establish a new genre, a new mode of expression. Likewise it also fails to re-establish a current mode or extend and develop a literary style. In plain terms that means it belongs nowhere, has no recognisable nor definable style and yet fails to take new steps in establish a new genre; it is amateurish and unaccomplished.
...
I cannot see one logical or justifiable reason why anyone should waste their time or their money in reading this text. Unless it is prescribed reading, in which case I would question the teachers motivations for electing this a a core or supplementary text. I think if you are studying American Literature, literature of death and dying, family structures etc. there are MUCH better books out there than this."
Monday, September 24, 2012
Nathanael West - Miss Lonelyhearts
"Ugh. What an utterly lousy book."
"What a bizarre book. Maybe it's that it was written so long ago, but I just found so many of the dialogue, scenes, and situations so strange that I didn't get people's responses to anything about 95% of the time."
"Life is bleak. Boo-hoo. Don't read this book unless they force you to do it for school. Avoid like poison otherwise."
"The characters are all supposed to be in deep emotional despair, but it is impossible to connect with them or their pain because so little of their lives is available to us. They are dressed up cardboard, mannequins wearing clothing. In the end, these are people we don't know and don't care about. They are riders on the subway of life. We get on, we notice they are absorbed it their own thoughts, their own pains. But the vision lingers only so long as it takes to exit the next stop. There is nothing there, no connection to remember them by. In the end we just don't care about them. We have our own lives to live. West is not up to the challenge. In all, a very unsatisfying read. Don't buy into the hype."
"a new veiw
while the writers craft may be good, and there are many levels to this story, it is not one to contrive morals from."
"What a bizarre book. Maybe it's that it was written so long ago, but I just found so many of the dialogue, scenes, and situations so strange that I didn't get people's responses to anything about 95% of the time."
"Life is bleak. Boo-hoo. Don't read this book unless they force you to do it for school. Avoid like poison otherwise."
"The characters are all supposed to be in deep emotional despair, but it is impossible to connect with them or their pain because so little of their lives is available to us. They are dressed up cardboard, mannequins wearing clothing. In the end, these are people we don't know and don't care about. They are riders on the subway of life. We get on, we notice they are absorbed it their own thoughts, their own pains. But the vision lingers only so long as it takes to exit the next stop. There is nothing there, no connection to remember them by. In the end we just don't care about them. We have our own lives to live. West is not up to the challenge. In all, a very unsatisfying read. Don't buy into the hype."
"a new veiw
while the writers craft may be good, and there are many levels to this story, it is not one to contrive morals from."
Friday, September 21, 2012
Ralph Ellison - Invisible Man IV
"'Invisible Man' is a boring book. The only thing that it's really about is how black people were treated after slavery ... The only think this book is about is how black people were treated so badly, I don't feel bad for them because they didn't try to change it. I think that since the man moved into a free state where they treated black people a little better that he should have done something greater instead of becoming an insirational speaker for some secret organization. All he did was speak infront of people speeche after speech. And all for what?
In the end he gave up, he accepted defeat. He simple accepted something taht he could have changed."
"The narrator really bothered me. Shit just happens to this guy, but I feel like he doesn’t react to it realistically. He completely believes that it’s not his fault, but he never try’s to find out if there’s something he can do about it, or if there is someone behind these events."
"Too bad Mr. Ellison doesn't rise above the hateful messages in his book. He leaves us feeling like he is the black-equivalent of an elderly white racist skinhead."
"Let me start off by saying I am not impressed by this book. And dats all I gots ta say bout dat. yassah. If ever there was a book that should be banned, I think this might be one"
"the message one seems to draw from the book, is that african americans do not matter and cannot overcome racial prejudice. To reach this conclusion takes 580 pages and a myriad of sureal episodes."
"Ellison dehumanizes his white counterparts, believing them to fundamnetally the same."
"The book contains 581 pages. The story could have been well told in half that space, saving countless stress in the process. Sure, the grammar is good, the spelling is faultless, the punctuation is right on."
"this book is really, really, really, really long, and probably not worth the time it takes to read"
"I thought it was going to be mostly about a man isolating himself from the world. To my surprise the book is about a black man and the struggles he endures because of his race. There are many parts of this book that I found upsetting"
"This book is like the whatchamacallit of Frederick Douglas.
Some Black Guy, In sometime, where Black Guys, such as him, are not liked, or paid attention to cause they’re black guys. I can barely get two sentences in each time I read. It’s so close to non-fiction. It’s so boring. Anyone who says it isn’t is dead on the inside. Dead, or dying.
Do you know what 1984(the book we were supposed to read….) is about?
COOL SHIT. About shit-crazed governments controlling people’s ever goddamned move.
Muthafucking COOL SHIT."
In the end he gave up, he accepted defeat. He simple accepted something taht he could have changed."
"The narrator really bothered me. Shit just happens to this guy, but I feel like he doesn’t react to it realistically. He completely believes that it’s not his fault, but he never try’s to find out if there’s something he can do about it, or if there is someone behind these events."
"Too bad Mr. Ellison doesn't rise above the hateful messages in his book. He leaves us feeling like he is the black-equivalent of an elderly white racist skinhead."
"Let me start off by saying I am not impressed by this book. And dats all I gots ta say bout dat. yassah. If ever there was a book that should be banned, I think this might be one"
"the message one seems to draw from the book, is that african americans do not matter and cannot overcome racial prejudice. To reach this conclusion takes 580 pages and a myriad of sureal episodes."
"Ellison dehumanizes his white counterparts, believing them to fundamnetally the same."
"The book contains 581 pages. The story could have been well told in half that space, saving countless stress in the process. Sure, the grammar is good, the spelling is faultless, the punctuation is right on."
"this book is really, really, really, really long, and probably not worth the time it takes to read"
"I thought it was going to be mostly about a man isolating himself from the world. To my surprise the book is about a black man and the struggles he endures because of his race. There are many parts of this book that I found upsetting"
"This book is like the whatchamacallit of Frederick Douglas.
Some Black Guy, In sometime, where Black Guys, such as him, are not liked, or paid attention to cause they’re black guys. I can barely get two sentences in each time I read. It’s so close to non-fiction. It’s so boring. Anyone who says it isn’t is dead on the inside. Dead, or dying.
Do you know what 1984(the book we were supposed to read….) is about?
COOL SHIT. About shit-crazed governments controlling people’s ever goddamned move.
Muthafucking COOL SHIT."
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Ralph Ellison - Invisible Man III
"He needs to learn to control his anger."
"The logical fallacies are so numerous that they discount the entire meaning of the book."
"Uncle Tom's Cabin has largely the same message (though it is perhaps not as stylistically advanced), and has had a far greater impact on the Nation's awareness and treatment of blacks."
"I wanted to shake him! He was such a darned fool who never used his brain and continutally erupted into violent anger. What a waste of a life"
"If Ellison's motivation was to show the crushing effects of racism, then his character should have been less of a self-centered fool"
"How often can you blame others without looking at yourself?"
"I understand the plight, but the book seems sad rather than proactive."
"It is hard to believe that it took all those hardships for him to 'find' himself. Is anyone that naive. I hope not."
"A disturbing portrayal of the perception a black man has of white America. It has not earned a place on my list of favorite novels, but I am pleased that I persevered in my struggle to read this book, and even more in my struggle to write about it."
"I found myself early on with the impression of an unintelligent liar, telling me poor lies and expecting me to believe them because he has already fooled himself into believing them. That impression was confirmed again and again with each subsequent tale. Several times I actually called the book a liar out loud (in manners of speech), putting it down in disgust. The more I read, the more I felt burdened as I have in my life when forced to listen to similarly poor liars, telling me stupid fantasies in an attempt to either impress me or to avoid punishment. Perhaps Mr. Ellison was too clever for me and has actually written a tale told by a dense, pathological liar, to see whether his audience would figure it out."
"As an American historian, I probably should've read it a long time ago. I did not. I found it to be uninteresting"
"It made sense for the protagonist to feel invisible because of how much he was kicked around not only by white society but also by his fellow black 'Brothers.'"
"I bought this because it was required reading for my son's high school English class. He got a few chapters in and said Mom I don't think I should be reading this. I took the book and read about 30 pages before I put it down in disgust. I am not a prude by any stretch of the imagination. I am also not religious, so my criticism of this book does not stem from that either. I just think it's way too mature for a high school student. The story is told from the point of view of the 'invisible man' and one passage of the book describes in detail how he gazes upon the naked body of this girl, and how he wants to spit on her nipples and is consumed with desire to kill her. IMO it borders on pornographic. I don't understand how or why this book is considered 'literature' and I told my son he did not have to read it if it made him uncomfortable."
"There is no distinct conclusion."
"I thought this was about the invisible man. i kept wondering when he'd become invisible. disappointing."
"The logical fallacies are so numerous that they discount the entire meaning of the book."
"Uncle Tom's Cabin has largely the same message (though it is perhaps not as stylistically advanced), and has had a far greater impact on the Nation's awareness and treatment of blacks."
"I wanted to shake him! He was such a darned fool who never used his brain and continutally erupted into violent anger. What a waste of a life"
"If Ellison's motivation was to show the crushing effects of racism, then his character should have been less of a self-centered fool"
"How often can you blame others without looking at yourself?"
"I understand the plight, but the book seems sad rather than proactive."
"It is hard to believe that it took all those hardships for him to 'find' himself. Is anyone that naive. I hope not."
"A disturbing portrayal of the perception a black man has of white America. It has not earned a place on my list of favorite novels, but I am pleased that I persevered in my struggle to read this book, and even more in my struggle to write about it."
"I found myself early on with the impression of an unintelligent liar, telling me poor lies and expecting me to believe them because he has already fooled himself into believing them. That impression was confirmed again and again with each subsequent tale. Several times I actually called the book a liar out loud (in manners of speech), putting it down in disgust. The more I read, the more I felt burdened as I have in my life when forced to listen to similarly poor liars, telling me stupid fantasies in an attempt to either impress me or to avoid punishment. Perhaps Mr. Ellison was too clever for me and has actually written a tale told by a dense, pathological liar, to see whether his audience would figure it out."
"As an American historian, I probably should've read it a long time ago. I did not. I found it to be uninteresting"
"It made sense for the protagonist to feel invisible because of how much he was kicked around not only by white society but also by his fellow black 'Brothers.'"
"I bought this because it was required reading for my son's high school English class. He got a few chapters in and said Mom I don't think I should be reading this. I took the book and read about 30 pages before I put it down in disgust. I am not a prude by any stretch of the imagination. I am also not religious, so my criticism of this book does not stem from that either. I just think it's way too mature for a high school student. The story is told from the point of view of the 'invisible man' and one passage of the book describes in detail how he gazes upon the naked body of this girl, and how he wants to spit on her nipples and is consumed with desire to kill her. IMO it borders on pornographic. I don't understand how or why this book is considered 'literature' and I told my son he did not have to read it if it made him uncomfortable."
"There is no distinct conclusion."
"I thought this was about the invisible man. i kept wondering when he'd become invisible. disappointing."
Monday, September 17, 2012
Ralph Ellison - Invisible Man II
"T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E. No substance! This is the most boring book ever. I couldn't even concentrate on the sparknotes."
"an inferior and turgid work of literature"
"Very dark book that was a huge waste of my time!!!"
"I did not like this book very much, mainly because the narrator rubbed me the wrong way. He came off as very arrogant and even ignorant ... He is the reason that he is invisible! That really made me angry. However, I did like the perspective of the book, even if an aggravating African American man was the narrator."
"A seminal work in 'race relations' -- a genre that should have been banished to idiocy (along with religion and the death penalty) years ago. What I mean by that is this: there is no such thing as 'race,' and people should realize we are all just *people* and move the hell on."
"I thought that it was extremely difficult to actually be interested in this book because of how predictable the story is. Of course the black community would have been oppressed during the 1930's, and of course blacks would be discriminated against by the white people in the community."
"It's actually just kind of dated and doesn't sufficiently enlighten us from a more color-blind age what the black experience was really like under such systemic racism."
"The speech that gets him into college is insightful/passionate enough"
"I have been trying to get through this one for a year, but I just can't take it anymore. I have officially decided to give up on it at the half-way point. Maybe it has a message or some literary value, but I am just not getting it."
"I was done with it after about 15 pages. Of course, the book is about 350 pages, so that really made for some difficulty in my life when I had to write a 10 page paper on it."
YEAH, SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAD SOME REAL DIFFICULTY IN YOUR LIFE THERE
"I'm afraid my stomach was just too weak for this book. I'm highly effected by imagery and this book nearly knocked me off my feet. There just wasn't enough to justify how long it took me to recover from the reading."
"My hate stems from the fact that we spent nearly a month of class dissecting this book and I was never so miserable in my entire life."
I'M AWARDING A PRIZE TO THIS, POSSIBLY THE MOST MEANINGLESS PARAGRAPH I HAVE EVER READ:
"I believe this novel was also written as a narrative, retaining the overall quality found within a narration. The author displayed the style of writing with historical accuracy and radical development. Done in a narrative style with a strong sense of time and place, Ellison was aware of his ideas and character's growth throughout the novel. I strongly believe that Ellison was aware of this theme. He displayed it accurately throughout."
"an inferior and turgid work of literature"
"Very dark book that was a huge waste of my time!!!"
"I did not like this book very much, mainly because the narrator rubbed me the wrong way. He came off as very arrogant and even ignorant ... He is the reason that he is invisible! That really made me angry. However, I did like the perspective of the book, even if an aggravating African American man was the narrator."
"A seminal work in 'race relations' -- a genre that should have been banished to idiocy (along with religion and the death penalty) years ago. What I mean by that is this: there is no such thing as 'race,' and people should realize we are all just *people* and move the hell on."
"I thought that it was extremely difficult to actually be interested in this book because of how predictable the story is. Of course the black community would have been oppressed during the 1930's, and of course blacks would be discriminated against by the white people in the community."
"It's actually just kind of dated and doesn't sufficiently enlighten us from a more color-blind age what the black experience was really like under such systemic racism."
"The speech that gets him into college is insightful/passionate enough"
"I have been trying to get through this one for a year, but I just can't take it anymore. I have officially decided to give up on it at the half-way point. Maybe it has a message or some literary value, but I am just not getting it."
"I was done with it after about 15 pages. Of course, the book is about 350 pages, so that really made for some difficulty in my life when I had to write a 10 page paper on it."
YEAH, SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAD SOME REAL DIFFICULTY IN YOUR LIFE THERE
"I'm afraid my stomach was just too weak for this book. I'm highly effected by imagery and this book nearly knocked me off my feet. There just wasn't enough to justify how long it took me to recover from the reading."
"My hate stems from the fact that we spent nearly a month of class dissecting this book and I was never so miserable in my entire life."
I'M AWARDING A PRIZE TO THIS, POSSIBLY THE MOST MEANINGLESS PARAGRAPH I HAVE EVER READ:
"I believe this novel was also written as a narrative, retaining the overall quality found within a narration. The author displayed the style of writing with historical accuracy and radical development. Done in a narrative style with a strong sense of time and place, Ellison was aware of his ideas and character's growth throughout the novel. I strongly believe that Ellison was aware of this theme. He displayed it accurately throughout."
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Ralph Ellison - Invisible Man
"First off, he isn't really invisible. That was disappointment enough"
"I don't care about the plot, I don't care about the characters, I hate that he whines and is stupid over and over and over again."
"I don't know what it is. Is it because I'm white? Because I'm 17? Because I live in 21st century suburban Ohio? I'm not sure which reason explains it, but I did not understand this book at all."
"I thought it was a boring topic, and I thought the events that happened in the book were boring. I probably would have liked the book more if I could find a way to relate to it, but I could not."
"Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison was a boring book. Ellison used a lot of big words that sometimes made it hard to understand."
"This book is very confusing to say the least. It travels back into his past and even back to the present day ... I really do not recomend this book to anyone. Its almost sick and very racist page in and page out."
"READERS should be aware that, like what the title implies, this holistic piece of SHIT is all about nothing. while the content of this shit is perhaps a realistic representation of what probably is the world's most desperate attempt to appear descriptive and meaningful, it actually is nothing more than a long, tedious raving of a young man whose sole occupation in life stands alone--forcing meaning into issues that never make you give a damn hoot.you can call me illiterate for failing to recognize whatever merit more 'literate' people have so far managed to unravel in this solid crap, but for my part it's this simple: truly liking this book requires more than just good education and refinement. you have to at least be fucking desperate and pretentious, and perhaps hypnotized, and, on the whole, insane to feel some sort of appreciation for this so-called novel."
"It was okay. I was interesting in reading it because it was the only character from 'The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen' whom I did not know."
"This was not good. Most of the time I spent reading this book was actually spent re-reading parts because I felt like I had missed important facts. Like, since when is the character on a horse? It was not described that he was on a horse and yet suddenly he is being described as jumping down from a horse. Crap like this all through the book."
"As a Caucasian middle class teenage girl, I could not relate to this book nor can I see the importance in the subject matter."
"There is a lot of mature content that I'll just never be old enough to read."
"Gross language and visual scenes. Disturbing uses of the themes in the book. I know the guy was trying to make a point, but other novels do a much more impressive job with symbolism and imagery and yet they STILL enforce the reading of this for school. It's always the same every year, reading a piece of depressing "literature" on black slavery/persecution or the Holocaust. I understand that we need to appreciate and understand the social significance of these time periods, but book after book of the same subject matter? With inappropriate qualities, nonetheless?"
"I don't care about the plot, I don't care about the characters, I hate that he whines and is stupid over and over and over again."
"I don't know what it is. Is it because I'm white? Because I'm 17? Because I live in 21st century suburban Ohio? I'm not sure which reason explains it, but I did not understand this book at all."
"I thought it was a boring topic, and I thought the events that happened in the book were boring. I probably would have liked the book more if I could find a way to relate to it, but I could not."
"Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison was a boring book. Ellison used a lot of big words that sometimes made it hard to understand."
"This book is very confusing to say the least. It travels back into his past and even back to the present day ... I really do not recomend this book to anyone. Its almost sick and very racist page in and page out."
"READERS should be aware that, like what the title implies, this holistic piece of SHIT is all about nothing. while the content of this shit is perhaps a realistic representation of what probably is the world's most desperate attempt to appear descriptive and meaningful, it actually is nothing more than a long, tedious raving of a young man whose sole occupation in life stands alone--forcing meaning into issues that never make you give a damn hoot.you can call me illiterate for failing to recognize whatever merit more 'literate' people have so far managed to unravel in this solid crap, but for my part it's this simple: truly liking this book requires more than just good education and refinement. you have to at least be fucking desperate and pretentious, and perhaps hypnotized, and, on the whole, insane to feel some sort of appreciation for this so-called novel."
"It was okay. I was interesting in reading it because it was the only character from 'The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen' whom I did not know."
"This was not good. Most of the time I spent reading this book was actually spent re-reading parts because I felt like I had missed important facts. Like, since when is the character on a horse? It was not described that he was on a horse and yet suddenly he is being described as jumping down from a horse. Crap like this all through the book."
"As a Caucasian middle class teenage girl, I could not relate to this book nor can I see the importance in the subject matter."
"There is a lot of mature content that I'll just never be old enough to read."
"Gross language and visual scenes. Disturbing uses of the themes in the book. I know the guy was trying to make a point, but other novels do a much more impressive job with symbolism and imagery and yet they STILL enforce the reading of this for school. It's always the same every year, reading a piece of depressing "literature" on black slavery/persecution or the Holocaust. I understand that we need to appreciate and understand the social significance of these time periods, but book after book of the same subject matter? With inappropriate qualities, nonetheless?"
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Shakespeare - Much Ado About Nothing
"Much Ado About Nothing is just another well written 19th century play by William Shakespeare."
"I did not like this book very much. There was a lot of conflict between characters."
"I really didn't get what they were saying (I doubt people actually said stuff like that)"
"Shakespeare wrote some amazing tragedies, but his comedies are basically twee, glorified rom-coms, written for the 'You've Got Mail' and 'Must Love Dogs' demographic as it existed in the 17th century. Absoultely nauseating."
"Let's face it, there aren't too many of Shakespeare's females who kick ass. Yes, we all can name the four or five that don't quite suck (Kat, Portia, Viola, Emilia, etc) but good strong feminine characters were not, it seems, the bard's strong suit. So as you wade through the whiny, conniving, helpless throngs of man worshipping wenches that appear in nearly all Shakespeare plays, it can be tempting to just give up looking for redemption."
"This is the first Shakespearean play I've read outside of an English class and its the first time I've realized why we read Shakespearean plays in English class - they're so damn obvious once you get past the frilly olde English.
Shakespeare's characters explicitly tell the reader the themes of the play in the first act or so. There's little complexity to be unraveled.
Sure there are story twists and surprise encounters, but nothing that challenges your expectations or introduces new ideas. The twists and turns are shallow at best and more akin to those of a soap opera than a great novel.
...
American schools should not rely on Shakespeare as much as they do. Sure its nice to introduce students to his creative use of language but how much will they really learn from the stories?
American students would be much better prepared for college and life were they exposed to books on great ideas. I'm talking about Plato, Ayn Rand, Asimov, Frank Herbert, and all the other great authors who base their books in ideas."
"I did not like this book very much. There was a lot of conflict between characters."
"I really didn't get what they were saying (I doubt people actually said stuff like that)"
"Shakespeare wrote some amazing tragedies, but his comedies are basically twee, glorified rom-coms, written for the 'You've Got Mail' and 'Must Love Dogs' demographic as it existed in the 17th century. Absoultely nauseating."
"Let's face it, there aren't too many of Shakespeare's females who kick ass. Yes, we all can name the four or five that don't quite suck (Kat, Portia, Viola, Emilia, etc) but good strong feminine characters were not, it seems, the bard's strong suit. So as you wade through the whiny, conniving, helpless throngs of man worshipping wenches that appear in nearly all Shakespeare plays, it can be tempting to just give up looking for redemption."
"This is the first Shakespearean play I've read outside of an English class and its the first time I've realized why we read Shakespearean plays in English class - they're so damn obvious once you get past the frilly olde English.
Shakespeare's characters explicitly tell the reader the themes of the play in the first act or so. There's little complexity to be unraveled.
Sure there are story twists and surprise encounters, but nothing that challenges your expectations or introduces new ideas. The twists and turns are shallow at best and more akin to those of a soap opera than a great novel.
...
American schools should not rely on Shakespeare as much as they do. Sure its nice to introduce students to his creative use of language but how much will they really learn from the stories?
American students would be much better prepared for college and life were they exposed to books on great ideas. I'm talking about Plato, Ayn Rand, Asimov, Frank Herbert, and all the other great authors who base their books in ideas."
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Herman Melville - Moby-Dick V
"What kind of horrible, unreadable, nasty piece of trash is this and why do they make kids read this. I couldn't even get through the Cliff Notes it was that bad."
"I read this book as a challenge to myself. That is why I literally have no one to blame but myeslf.
I thought this would be interesting. I was wrong. This HAS to be THE most boring book EVER.
I waded through 300 hundred fricking pages of some of the most boring drivel ever created. Seriously Herman did you have to go to so much painstaking detail. After 100 pages I wouldn't have held it against you if you left one freaking detail as a mystery. But I persevered. Then when the whale finally shows it's big ass up, I get a page and a half of the whale kicking their asses. Seriously Herman? Seriously?
In conclusion this was a waste of time."
"Quite poorly written, it's read nowadays just to read it. Ahab turned his life into revenge. He could have chosen to get over it and live his life - instead, he devotes himself to a futile, desperate pursuit of revenge."
"Is there any chance that this book would get across an editor’s desk in its current state today? We think not — all the good stuff is buried under Melville’s endless self-indulgent verbiage. In our literary culture, the book has become a behemoth to slay in itself, and such a quest would obviously be cheapened by skipping all the bits about the specifics of whaling tools, but that said, wouldn’t it actually be a better book if those were left out?"
"Shouldn't be a classic. We all decided it was regardless of literary quality."
"I have to admit I hated this book too. I started calling it 'Everything you ever wanted to know about whaling and were afraid to ask' and then I didn’t finish it."
"Moby Dick is actually a bit of a joke in literary circles. It is poorly written, and it likely would not be published today if it weren’t for its reputation."
"When you have college professors telling you to skip chapters(which happened to me), then something is obviously not right. The story itself is definitely a classic, but it needed a good editor to strip out the chapters on whale biology and the entire chapter dedicated to his bowl of soup."
"I read this book as a challenge to myself. That is why I literally have no one to blame but myeslf.
I thought this would be interesting. I was wrong. This HAS to be THE most boring book EVER.
I waded through 300 hundred fricking pages of some of the most boring drivel ever created. Seriously Herman did you have to go to so much painstaking detail. After 100 pages I wouldn't have held it against you if you left one freaking detail as a mystery. But I persevered. Then when the whale finally shows it's big ass up, I get a page and a half of the whale kicking their asses. Seriously Herman? Seriously?
In conclusion this was a waste of time."
"Quite poorly written, it's read nowadays just to read it. Ahab turned his life into revenge. He could have chosen to get over it and live his life - instead, he devotes himself to a futile, desperate pursuit of revenge."
"Is there any chance that this book would get across an editor’s desk in its current state today? We think not — all the good stuff is buried under Melville’s endless self-indulgent verbiage. In our literary culture, the book has become a behemoth to slay in itself, and such a quest would obviously be cheapened by skipping all the bits about the specifics of whaling tools, but that said, wouldn’t it actually be a better book if those were left out?"
"Shouldn't be a classic. We all decided it was regardless of literary quality."
"I have to admit I hated this book too. I started calling it 'Everything you ever wanted to know about whaling and were afraid to ask' and then I didn’t finish it."
"Moby Dick is actually a bit of a joke in literary circles. It is poorly written, and it likely would not be published today if it weren’t for its reputation."
"When you have college professors telling you to skip chapters(which happened to me), then something is obviously not right. The story itself is definitely a classic, but it needed a good editor to strip out the chapters on whale biology and the entire chapter dedicated to his bowl of soup."
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince III
"a glymps into the undeveloped human min"
"Personaly i didnt like it a all because its is extremely boring. All it seems to be is a long essay that rambles on and on."
"This is probably one of the most backwards and boring books I've ever read. It is a complete waist of time, unless you plan on becoming some sort of ruler, and even then I'd pass it up. Steer clear of this one."
"Piece of trash!
this book is the most confusing & stupid book i have ever read! ... i hate this book i wish it would die!"
"this book isn't that bad... i mean... i've never read a book like this. this book talked of how a prince is suppose to act and stuff! ow gosh... this was a very boring book.... maybe fun and interesting for those with a mind for conquering or trying to persuade people to love them... great for political people.... but for me... and i maybe speakin for others... this was a very boring book.... I don't like the way Machiavelli wrote this... this was just to help him with his reputation... i guess i don't think very brillantely.... well... it was ok... but not good to read just for fun.. cuz it's not fun..."
"Niccolò Machiavelli was a Big Fat Idiot
Machiavelli's The Prince is a piece of filth. Everything that is wrong in the world today can be directly attributed to this atrocity.
Take, for instance, crime. The basic mentality of most criminals is that crime pays for them, so long as they do not get caught. This philosophy is remarkably similar to that of Machiavelli, and is most likely derived from his work. Machiavelli taught that the end justifies the means. This can be easily interpreted as an encouragement of crime, so much as the criminal was benefiting from the crime he was committing. Criminals thought it was a good deed to murder, steal, loot, pillage, and rape; they perceived themself as making other people proud by vandalizing and slaughtering animals. Without Machiavelli's philosophies, criminals would not feel that they themselves were justified in their actions and all crime today would have been averted.
...
Further evidence of the threat of The Prince is prejudice. The basis for all prejudice is Machiavelli. At one point in his work, he refers to being 'effeminate' as a bad quality, synonymous with being cowardice. Thus, he advocated the belief that men were superior to women. Followers of Machiavelli soon took this belief and expanded it to include all that are not biologically similar to them as being inferior. Before long, people would run down streets, screaming in ignorance, claiming that the star-bellied sneeches or what have you were not true sentient beings, reducing others and themselves to sub-animal status and thus commencing the demise of human civilization.
...
In addition, the work of Machiavelli is the sole cause of poverty. Machiavelli encouraged the rich to keep all their money to themselves; he claimed it was better to be miserly than generous. As a result of this, the gap between the upper and lower classes was increased on both ends. The rich continued to become more lavish and extravagant, shoving their fine coats and money in the faces of the poor, while the poor, cut off from all the donations they would have received, became more miserable, and started smashing stuff in rage. However, since Machiavelli advocated the idea of being feared rather than loved, the upper class thrived off the lower classes fear that they would be slain mercilessly rather than showing love by helping eliminate poverty."
"Personaly i didnt like it a all because its is extremely boring. All it seems to be is a long essay that rambles on and on."
"This is probably one of the most backwards and boring books I've ever read. It is a complete waist of time, unless you plan on becoming some sort of ruler, and even then I'd pass it up. Steer clear of this one."
"Piece of trash!
this book is the most confusing & stupid book i have ever read! ... i hate this book i wish it would die!"
"this book isn't that bad... i mean... i've never read a book like this. this book talked of how a prince is suppose to act and stuff! ow gosh... this was a very boring book.... maybe fun and interesting for those with a mind for conquering or trying to persuade people to love them... great for political people.... but for me... and i maybe speakin for others... this was a very boring book.... I don't like the way Machiavelli wrote this... this was just to help him with his reputation... i guess i don't think very brillantely.... well... it was ok... but not good to read just for fun.. cuz it's not fun..."
"Niccolò Machiavelli was a Big Fat Idiot
Machiavelli's The Prince is a piece of filth. Everything that is wrong in the world today can be directly attributed to this atrocity.
Take, for instance, crime. The basic mentality of most criminals is that crime pays for them, so long as they do not get caught. This philosophy is remarkably similar to that of Machiavelli, and is most likely derived from his work. Machiavelli taught that the end justifies the means. This can be easily interpreted as an encouragement of crime, so much as the criminal was benefiting from the crime he was committing. Criminals thought it was a good deed to murder, steal, loot, pillage, and rape; they perceived themself as making other people proud by vandalizing and slaughtering animals. Without Machiavelli's philosophies, criminals would not feel that they themselves were justified in their actions and all crime today would have been averted.
...
Further evidence of the threat of The Prince is prejudice. The basis for all prejudice is Machiavelli. At one point in his work, he refers to being 'effeminate' as a bad quality, synonymous with being cowardice. Thus, he advocated the belief that men were superior to women. Followers of Machiavelli soon took this belief and expanded it to include all that are not biologically similar to them as being inferior. Before long, people would run down streets, screaming in ignorance, claiming that the star-bellied sneeches or what have you were not true sentient beings, reducing others and themselves to sub-animal status and thus commencing the demise of human civilization.
...
In addition, the work of Machiavelli is the sole cause of poverty. Machiavelli encouraged the rich to keep all their money to themselves; he claimed it was better to be miserly than generous. As a result of this, the gap between the upper and lower classes was increased on both ends. The rich continued to become more lavish and extravagant, shoving their fine coats and money in the faces of the poor, while the poor, cut off from all the donations they would have received, became more miserable, and started smashing stuff in rage. However, since Machiavelli advocated the idea of being feared rather than loved, the upper class thrived off the lower classes fear that they would be slain mercilessly rather than showing love by helping eliminate poverty."
Friday, September 7, 2012
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince II
"Coming in at just over 100 pages this was probably the hardest read.. ever."
"While I think that some people may still subscribe to a lot of his war mongering and deceitful ways I don't think anyone would classify someone like that as a good leader today."
"I disagree with his assertion that all men are inherently selfish and wicked. I don't think this is a particularly sophisticated view of mankind."
"It was filled with archane references to Italian lords of little import that I had never heard of."
"I have decided that he fits in my catagory of 'Thats Wacked'"
"Kill 'em all, better to be feared. There I just saved you some time."
"I think he is evil. =D"
"Among his many recommendations to the Prince, Machiavelli suggests that the Prince order his armies to slaughter any people who have before tasted freedom. For, as he argues, they will always rise against a ruler who would oppress them.
From such a recommendation, is it not apparent that Mr. Machiavelli would like to see mankind enslaved, rather than free? Despite this, Machiavelli is often praised for his candidness and pragmatism!"
"Just because he makes a lot of good points, doesn't mean I have to like it. Machiavelli was a pessimistic jerk."
"I learned not to use run-on sentences like Machiavelli did. Boring."
"thought it would be better but turned into typical philisophical drivel."
"most of this book is nothing more than a history lesson. Overrated.........."
"What you should know is once you start reading this book, you will find tha language very hard to understank, and if you did bad on the SAT, your in tough luck. Good luck to those who will try to read 'The Beast.'"
"All I can say about those who have praised this book is that they surely must be more intelligent than I."
THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING; THAT YOU ADMIT IT
"While I think that some people may still subscribe to a lot of his war mongering and deceitful ways I don't think anyone would classify someone like that as a good leader today."
"I disagree with his assertion that all men are inherently selfish and wicked. I don't think this is a particularly sophisticated view of mankind."
"It was filled with archane references to Italian lords of little import that I had never heard of."
"I have decided that he fits in my catagory of 'Thats Wacked'"
"Kill 'em all, better to be feared. There I just saved you some time."
"I think he is evil. =D"
"Among his many recommendations to the Prince, Machiavelli suggests that the Prince order his armies to slaughter any people who have before tasted freedom. For, as he argues, they will always rise against a ruler who would oppress them.
From such a recommendation, is it not apparent that Mr. Machiavelli would like to see mankind enslaved, rather than free? Despite this, Machiavelli is often praised for his candidness and pragmatism!"
"Just because he makes a lot of good points, doesn't mean I have to like it. Machiavelli was a pessimistic jerk."
"I learned not to use run-on sentences like Machiavelli did. Boring."
"thought it would be better but turned into typical philisophical drivel."
"most of this book is nothing more than a history lesson. Overrated.........."
"What you should know is once you start reading this book, you will find tha language very hard to understank, and if you did bad on the SAT, your in tough luck. Good luck to those who will try to read 'The Beast.'"
"All I can say about those who have praised this book is that they surely must be more intelligent than I."
THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING; THAT YOU ADMIT IT
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
"Well, you probably know about this book. Now, I'm sure that I could have read it much more closely and come up with some very interesting material to think about. But honestly- it's just not that interesting ... without knowing the context of the stories he tells it's difficult to know why I should care."
"It was too hard to read and irrelevant to me"
"It didn't help that the gentleman reading the book had a very deep voice. It was well below the range to keep me engaged in the book."
"Maybe if he was spanked more when he was 'The Little Prince' he wouldn't have grown up so annoying. A grown man wrote this? Thinks more highly of himself than anyone else possibly could, for no good reason. Definitely has 'mommy issues.'"
"The main flaw of it in my opinion was that it relied to heavily on historical examples that most people today have don't know of and has to explain them"
"I will admit it - I didn't finish this book. I really found nothing interesting in this book at all ... I read it now because I have a group o f students reading it for a presentation and I htought that I should really know exactly what was in the book. I read the first 70 pages and then just skimmed the rest."
"I got through six and a half chapters and realized that I couldn't repeat anything because I wasn't even paying attention. I'm not sure there was even a plot."
"INCOMPREHENSIBLE.
Recommendation: Don’t bother."
~DEEP INSIGHTS CORNER~
"So, what I learned about Machiavelli that they probably don't teach in school is this:
1- He was as selfish as a person can be and only looked out for himself.
2- He was a fake and a phony.
3- He had no pride, dignity or self-respect.
4- He was a butt-kisser and a suck-up.
If Machiavelli was alive today his profession would be corrupt politician."
"I don't say this lightly, I do not say this in jest, I have had years to think about this review, I have held this opinion your years and have told anyone that will listen to me, I hope that you grasp the gravity when I say:
This is one of the worst books I have ever read.
I'll spoil it for you:
The Prince is right.
You are wrong.
Now you don't need to buy this trite book."
"It was too hard to read and irrelevant to me"
"It didn't help that the gentleman reading the book had a very deep voice. It was well below the range to keep me engaged in the book."
"Maybe if he was spanked more when he was 'The Little Prince' he wouldn't have grown up so annoying. A grown man wrote this? Thinks more highly of himself than anyone else possibly could, for no good reason. Definitely has 'mommy issues.'"
"The main flaw of it in my opinion was that it relied to heavily on historical examples that most people today have don't know of and has to explain them"
"I will admit it - I didn't finish this book. I really found nothing interesting in this book at all ... I read it now because I have a group o f students reading it for a presentation and I htought that I should really know exactly what was in the book. I read the first 70 pages and then just skimmed the rest."
"I got through six and a half chapters and realized that I couldn't repeat anything because I wasn't even paying attention. I'm not sure there was even a plot."
"INCOMPREHENSIBLE.
Recommendation: Don’t bother."
~DEEP INSIGHTS CORNER~
"So, what I learned about Machiavelli that they probably don't teach in school is this:
1- He was as selfish as a person can be and only looked out for himself.
2- He was a fake and a phony.
3- He had no pride, dignity or self-respect.
4- He was a butt-kisser and a suck-up.
If Machiavelli was alive today his profession would be corrupt politician."
"I don't say this lightly, I do not say this in jest, I have had years to think about this review, I have held this opinion your years and have told anyone that will listen to me, I hope that you grasp the gravity when I say:
This is one of the worst books I have ever read.
I'll spoil it for you:
The Prince is right.
You are wrong.
Now you don't need to buy this trite book."
Monday, September 3, 2012
Sophocles - Philoctetes
"the ending was a bit of a cop-out"
"I'm beginning to believe that the use of the Deus Ex Machina is just a sign of the lack of faith that writers have in characters ... Sophoclese got tired of writing the story and just decided to tell his characters what to do."
"it took over a year to re-read. Also? You can't make me read it again. Not ever."
"Depressing play basically"
"I'm beginning to believe that the use of the Deus Ex Machina is just a sign of the lack of faith that writers have in characters ... Sophoclese got tired of writing the story and just decided to tell his characters what to do."
"it took over a year to re-read. Also? You can't make me read it again. Not ever."
"Depressing play basically"
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Nathaniel Hawthorne - Young Goodman Brown
"Still don't think he can write good stories for crap"
"I don't like the way the author made the horror atmosphere..:p"
"Blasphemy against the true woodsman
This short tale, like many of the effervescent Hawthorne's works, exposes the general contempt that dutiful professionals of urbana have against the farmer. Here, a charming young man is afraid to explore the limits of his soul, who must venture the forest to retrieve a lost treasure, but will not, would not all his spirit to traverse the darkened elements.
Several generations of good language arts teacher, of the secondary caliber, are subverting their classes with this work. They had been seduced by the charms of this Harvard-graduates eloquence. Unknowing the true interests of the youth, our cultural shame is that nearby along the shelves is a book written by his neighbour called Walden.
It would benefit the 7th grader to read Thoreau than more than having his teacher's fantasies insinuated through this other work."
"I don't like the way the author made the horror atmosphere..:p"
"Blasphemy against the true woodsman
This short tale, like many of the effervescent Hawthorne's works, exposes the general contempt that dutiful professionals of urbana have against the farmer. Here, a charming young man is afraid to explore the limits of his soul, who must venture the forest to retrieve a lost treasure, but will not, would not all his spirit to traverse the darkened elements.
Several generations of good language arts teacher, of the secondary caliber, are subverting their classes with this work. They had been seduced by the charms of this Harvard-graduates eloquence. Unknowing the true interests of the youth, our cultural shame is that nearby along the shelves is a book written by his neighbour called Walden.
It would benefit the 7th grader to read Thoreau than more than having his teacher's fantasies insinuated through this other work."
Thursday, August 30, 2012
THE BEST OF AUGUST
HOMER - ODYSSEY
"Could a man be more self-centered? Why do we revere and praise this guy as a hero? The ONLY reason this book gets any star, is because I love Greek mythology. I thought, like with other classics I'm reading or re-reading as an adult, maybe I can interpret it differently and appreciate it better, whereas I might not have as a teen. Nope. Book sucks. I don't care if it is a classic and the oldest recorded story of man. It is a Mary-sue of wishful thinking and just as I would harshly judge a contemporary piece that replaces good story with fluff, I gladly shuffle this book back under my coffee table, hoping it does a better job of keeping my drinks from sliding to the floor, than it did at entertaining me."
MACHADO DE ASSIS - POSTHUMOUS MEMOIRS OF BRAS CUBAS
"Some say it is a novel but the author, the Brazilian Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis (1839-1908) says that is is a memoir. However, a memoir is supposed to be fiction. But how could this be fiction if it was written by the protagonist, the Brazilian rich and indolent Bras Cubas after his death? Dead people cannot write a novel"
JOYCE - ULYSSES
"The author did not seem interested in trying to communicate anything to the reader. When I checked Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Joyce ) I see that Pound promoted Joyce. I put 2 and 2 together and suspect Joyce is part of the Imagist school and that actually explains why the writing doesn't make sense."
HORACE - ARS POETICA
"Its odd that for the first time physics reflects actual life philosophy (not the college coarse you took to have it look good on your transcripts), and yet people are still hung up on these order systems like morality.
Morality is dead.
Nihilism is dead.
Ethic is dead.
And this is all so obvious with QM and string theory, yet yuppie college grads are so presistent with their dead greeks ... Horace was an idiot people, and it would be best to read him to learn to hate him better."
SALINGER - THE CATCHER IN THE RYE
"I am very open minded when it comes to literature (I even read through Mein Kampf without any objection) but I just hated this book!"
"The things Holden does aren't very realistic, which 16-year-old boy would hire a prostitute in stead of visiting his mum who lives a few blocks further? I think Holden is a sick person"
WEBER - THE PROTESTANT ETHIC AND THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM
"The idea that God brings you economic success (and by extension an omnipresent repression of success for others) is because you are part of his 'elite.' It's a Calvinist principle. They believe in predestination, so basically if you are doing well, it's because God wants you to and that makes it okay. Max Weber actually supported that ridiculous belief in his book."
BALDWIN - GO TELL IT ON THE MOUNTAIN
"Maybe this book just was not right for me, but I really would not recommend this to anyone who has a cheerful personality. The reader has to enjoy thinking about and pondering ideas in a book"
AUSTEN - PRIDE AND PREJUDICE
"Ohmigod, have I mentioned that I hate Jane Austen?!? I really, really hate Jane Austen. It took me a year to make it through this book. So much talking about nothing. So much of nothing happening in general. Someone enters a room, someone leaves a room.
A couple of notable scenes: Elizabeth Bennett's snappy comments when Darcy slights her and Darcy's lovelorn letter. Guess what? Both are just as good in films. Honestly, even though I teach English, I firmly believe every Jane Austen book makes for a better movie."
"Could a man be more self-centered? Why do we revere and praise this guy as a hero? The ONLY reason this book gets any star, is because I love Greek mythology. I thought, like with other classics I'm reading or re-reading as an adult, maybe I can interpret it differently and appreciate it better, whereas I might not have as a teen. Nope. Book sucks. I don't care if it is a classic and the oldest recorded story of man. It is a Mary-sue of wishful thinking and just as I would harshly judge a contemporary piece that replaces good story with fluff, I gladly shuffle this book back under my coffee table, hoping it does a better job of keeping my drinks from sliding to the floor, than it did at entertaining me."
MACHADO DE ASSIS - POSTHUMOUS MEMOIRS OF BRAS CUBAS
"Some say it is a novel but the author, the Brazilian Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis (1839-1908) says that is is a memoir. However, a memoir is supposed to be fiction. But how could this be fiction if it was written by the protagonist, the Brazilian rich and indolent Bras Cubas after his death? Dead people cannot write a novel"
JOYCE - ULYSSES
"The author did not seem interested in trying to communicate anything to the reader. When I checked Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Joyce ) I see that Pound promoted Joyce. I put 2 and 2 together and suspect Joyce is part of the Imagist school and that actually explains why the writing doesn't make sense."
HORACE - ARS POETICA
"Its odd that for the first time physics reflects actual life philosophy (not the college coarse you took to have it look good on your transcripts), and yet people are still hung up on these order systems like morality.
Morality is dead.
Nihilism is dead.
Ethic is dead.
And this is all so obvious with QM and string theory, yet yuppie college grads are so presistent with their dead greeks ... Horace was an idiot people, and it would be best to read him to learn to hate him better."
SALINGER - THE CATCHER IN THE RYE
"I am very open minded when it comes to literature (I even read through Mein Kampf without any objection) but I just hated this book!"
"The things Holden does aren't very realistic, which 16-year-old boy would hire a prostitute in stead of visiting his mum who lives a few blocks further? I think Holden is a sick person"
WEBER - THE PROTESTANT ETHIC AND THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM
"The idea that God brings you economic success (and by extension an omnipresent repression of success for others) is because you are part of his 'elite.' It's a Calvinist principle. They believe in predestination, so basically if you are doing well, it's because God wants you to and that makes it okay. Max Weber actually supported that ridiculous belief in his book."
BALDWIN - GO TELL IT ON THE MOUNTAIN
"Maybe this book just was not right for me, but I really would not recommend this to anyone who has a cheerful personality. The reader has to enjoy thinking about and pondering ideas in a book"
AUSTEN - PRIDE AND PREJUDICE
"Ohmigod, have I mentioned that I hate Jane Austen?!? I really, really hate Jane Austen. It took me a year to make it through this book. So much talking about nothing. So much of nothing happening in general. Someone enters a room, someone leaves a room.
A couple of notable scenes: Elizabeth Bennett's snappy comments when Darcy slights her and Darcy's lovelorn letter. Guess what? Both are just as good in films. Honestly, even though I teach English, I firmly believe every Jane Austen book makes for a better movie."
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Shakespeare - Henry V
"I do not recommend this book for a book club because there was not a whole lot to discuss and my group actually ran out of things to discuss. I recommend the movie by Oliver Stone because it follows the play very closely. In fact if you watch this, you should be fine with just skimming the play for review."
"This play is not numbered among Shakespeare's heavy-hitters. For one thing, King Harry is not a very interesting character."
"Stick to the comedy Willy Shakes."
"What a disgusting piece of propaganda this is! We're supposed to get all misty-eyed and patriotic over Henry's ambition to annex French lands? We're supposed to seriously believe that he cares about his troops?"
"Less a play than a propaganda piece trumpeting the virtues of benevolent royalty."
"This play is a piece of propaganda. It depicts Henry V as a hero."
"There is no cynical commentary in Henry V."
HA HA HA
"This play is not numbered among Shakespeare's heavy-hitters. For one thing, King Harry is not a very interesting character."
"Stick to the comedy Willy Shakes."
"What a disgusting piece of propaganda this is! We're supposed to get all misty-eyed and patriotic over Henry's ambition to annex French lands? We're supposed to seriously believe that he cares about his troops?"
"Less a play than a propaganda piece trumpeting the virtues of benevolent royalty."
"This play is a piece of propaganda. It depicts Henry V as a hero."
"There is no cynical commentary in Henry V."
HA HA HA
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Jane Austen - Pride and Prejudice III
"I am so into Jane Austen. I feel like she wrote all of her books just for me. I can't tell you how many times I've read her books. I wish she was alive so I could ask her to be my friend and follow her everywhere."
"Having always considered myself to be kind of an anglophile, I thought that I would like Jane Austen, that I was supposed to, but this is just too british, even for my taste."
"This book is about people who judge it each other before they knew it the other person. In this book over they over come their prejudice and find a some what happy ending. Even though they have to their"
"I tried to read this but I couldn't keep up with who was what to where. I watch a BBC movie of this and loved it."
"I hate reading old english"
"Ughhh.
This is the whole story:
None of the girls get married cuz theyre all so ugly. 345 pages of snobs without real money drinking tea and talking about their love life."
"Old English grammer fascinating to read - like stepping back in time for awhile. Thank goodness times have changed!"
"I only got halfway through it not because it was so difficult but because the characters would just not stop talking! I understand that this was written 200 years ago, but something this classic should be accessible to all classes and genders. The words were too verbose. Maybe a little more punch is what it needed, but description other than more dialogue would help carry that punch. If you are a women writer back then, it was very limited so I understand. One thing this novel has is plot, but it did not engage me one bit. I recommend the movie instead."
"Ohmigod, have I mentioned that I hate Jane Austen?!? I really, really hate Jane Austen. It took me a year to make it through this book. So much talking about nothing. So much of nothing happening in general. Someone enters a room, someone leaves a room.
A couple of notable scenes: Elizabeth Bennett's snappy comments when Darcy slights her and Darcy's lovelorn letter. Guess what? Both are just as good in films. Honestly, even though I teach English, I firmly believe every Jane Austen book makes for a better movie."
"Having always considered myself to be kind of an anglophile, I thought that I would like Jane Austen, that I was supposed to, but this is just too british, even for my taste."
"This book is about people who judge it each other before they knew it the other person. In this book over they over come their prejudice and find a some what happy ending. Even though they have to their"
"I tried to read this but I couldn't keep up with who was what to where. I watch a BBC movie of this and loved it."
"I hate reading old english"
"Ughhh.
This is the whole story:
None of the girls get married cuz theyre all so ugly. 345 pages of snobs without real money drinking tea and talking about their love life."
"Old English grammer fascinating to read - like stepping back in time for awhile. Thank goodness times have changed!"
"I only got halfway through it not because it was so difficult but because the characters would just not stop talking! I understand that this was written 200 years ago, but something this classic should be accessible to all classes and genders. The words were too verbose. Maybe a little more punch is what it needed, but description other than more dialogue would help carry that punch. If you are a women writer back then, it was very limited so I understand. One thing this novel has is plot, but it did not engage me one bit. I recommend the movie instead."
"Ohmigod, have I mentioned that I hate Jane Austen?!? I really, really hate Jane Austen. It took me a year to make it through this book. So much talking about nothing. So much of nothing happening in general. Someone enters a room, someone leaves a room.
A couple of notable scenes: Elizabeth Bennett's snappy comments when Darcy slights her and Darcy's lovelorn letter. Guess what? Both are just as good in films. Honestly, even though I teach English, I firmly believe every Jane Austen book makes for a better movie."
Thursday, August 23, 2012
James Baldwin - Go Tell It on the Mountain
"james baldwin sucks. if anyone understands his bs, lemme know."
"the black english dude?
here's what i have to say to him (even though he's dead): james, get over yourself. there is no such language as 'black' english damnit. english is a language."
"It is not a difficult book to read, because the vocabulary is not elevated. As a reader, I prefer books with a high vocabulary. When I was reading I was not challenged and that added to my discontent with this novel."
"Many adjectives send you in many directions looking for the theme. I still don't know what it is."
"Maybe this book just was not right for me, but I really would not recommend this to anyone who has a cheerful personality. The reader has to enjoy thinking about and pondering ideas in a book"
"I was shocked by the amount of sexual material in a book focused on Christianity in the African American Church. It is weird to be reading about breasts in the same book where a lot of the plot takes place in a church."
"A shame the author had such bad experiences that he felt he had to share them in this way. The ending should be glorious and hopeful, but instead I found myself wondering and doubtful for the poor young man. Too, too bad."
"the black english dude?
here's what i have to say to him (even though he's dead): james, get over yourself. there is no such language as 'black' english damnit. english is a language."
"It is not a difficult book to read, because the vocabulary is not elevated. As a reader, I prefer books with a high vocabulary. When I was reading I was not challenged and that added to my discontent with this novel."
"Many adjectives send you in many directions looking for the theme. I still don't know what it is."
"Maybe this book just was not right for me, but I really would not recommend this to anyone who has a cheerful personality. The reader has to enjoy thinking about and pondering ideas in a book"
"I was shocked by the amount of sexual material in a book focused on Christianity in the African American Church. It is weird to be reading about breasts in the same book where a lot of the plot takes place in a church."
"A shame the author had such bad experiences that he felt he had to share them in this way. The ending should be glorious and hopeful, but instead I found myself wondering and doubtful for the poor young man. Too, too bad."
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
SPECIAL: QUINTA ULTIMAQUE PHILIPPICA IN STUDENTES LITTERARUM
5. YOU'RE AN IDIOT
IT'S PROBABLY CLEAR THAT MOST OF THE PROBLEMS RAISED IN THE LAST WEEK COULD BE APPLIED TO MANY DISCIPLINES WITHIN THE HUMANITIES IN CURRENT HIGHER EDUCATION. IT MAY BE THAT THE PROBLEM IS NOT SO MUCH THE ENGLISH MAJOR AS THE ENGLISH MAJOR. SOMETHING IS SICK IN OUR UNIVERSITIES AND STUDENTS OF ENGLISH ARE LIKELY JUST VICTIMS OF THE PLAGUE.
WHEN ONE LOOKS AT THE RUNNING OF THE MODERN COLLEGE IT IS CLEAR THAT ITS AIMS ARE DIRECTLY AT ODDS WITH TEACHING STUDENTS TO ENGAGE WITH THE WORLD -- PAST, PRESENT OR FUTURE. THIS IS BUILT INTO THE SIMPLEST POLICIES AND FACILITIES. THE MASSIVELY-PROFITABLE DINING HALL MEANS MANY STUDENTS NEVER LEARN TO PREPARE FOOD FOR THEMSELVES, PROBABLY THE MOST PSYCHOLOGICALLY-IMPORTANT AND VITAL SKILL IN THE TRANSITION FROM CHILDHOOD TO ADULT INDEPENDENCE. CRIPPLING FEES KEEP STUDENTS IN FINANCIAL SERFDOM TO THEIR PARENTS AND TO BANKS, AND TUITION-AND-BOARD PACKAGES PROTECT THEM FROM EVERYDAY TRIVIALITIES LIKE BALANCING A BUDGET TO COVER GROCERIES, UTILITIES PAYMENTS, MEDICAL BILLS. HONOUR COUNCILS AND SPECIALIZED CAMPUS POLICE EXIST NOT ONLY TO PROTECT THEIR INSTITUTION'S REPUTATION, BUT TO PROTECT RICH WHITE TEENAGERS FROM THE SOCIETAL CONSEQUENCES OF IRRESPONSIBLE AND ILLEGAL ACTIONS, A SERVICE AFFORDED TO NO OTHER YOUTH DEMOGRAPHIC. OUR STUDENTS ARE DELIBERATELY TRAPPED IN ARTIFICIAL INFANCY.
THEIR TEACHERS ARE NO BETTER. THE PROFESSORS OF TODAY ARE SHEER PARODY OF THE GREAT SCHOLARS OF THE FIRST HALF OF LAST CENTURY. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO READ SCHOLARSHIP FROM THE 1860S THROUGH TO THE LATE 1950S AND NOT FEEL THE TREMENDOUS LOSS OUR DARK AGE HAS SUFFERED. THERE IS A CLEAR AND OMNIPRESENT ASSUMPTION IN THESE WORKS THAT A SCHOLAR IS A PERSON WHO KNOWS BY HEART EUROPEAN CULTURAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY IN DEPTH AND ACROSS ALL PERIODS, WHO HAS READING FLUENCY IN GREEK, LATIN, FRENCH, GERMAN AND ITALIAN, WHO IS A JUDICIOUS AND LEARNED CRITIC OF MUSIC, DRAMA, LITERATURE AND PAINTING. NOW THIS SEEMS LIKE AN IMPOSSIBLE DREAM. IT IS THE WORK OF A DOCTORATE TO GAIN BASIC EXPERTISE IN ANY ONE OF THESE TOPICS -- THERE ARE TOO MANY CONFERENCES TO ATTEND TO WASTE TIME PORING OVER HISTORY BOOKS, TOO MANY TEN-PAGE ARTICLES TO CRANK OUT TO BOTHER WITH ANOTHER LANGUAGE.
WHEN A DICTATOR COMES TO POWER IT IS TRADITIONAL FOR HIM TO KILL INTELLECTUALS. THIS TRAIL OF BLOOD RUNS FROM CICERO'S HANDS ON THE ROSTRA TO THE PURGES IN ITALY, RUSSIA AND GERMANY IN THE EARLIER PART OF LAST CENTURY, AND IN IRAN, CAMBODIA AND CHILE IN THE LATTER PART. AND YET IT IS DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE, IN OUR CENTURY, HOW ANYBODY COULD CONSIDER THE UNIVERSITY A POLITICAL THREAT. WE ARE TAUGHT BY AND TAUGHT TO BE THE MOST HARMLESS, INCOMPETENT AND INACTIVE THINKERS THE WORLD HAS EVER SEEN. THE FEW SCHOLARS WHO ARE LEARNED IN WORLD HISTORY AND POLITICS ARE ENGAGED IN WRITING MINI-ESSAYS FOR AN AUDIENCE OF TEN. THE ONLY THING APPROACHING POLITICAL IDEOLOGY ON OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES IS A SMUG, DETACHED, PARALYZED AND AHISTORICAL LIBERAL PARANOIA, FOR THAT IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE RATIONALIZATION AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE WHOSE FINANCIAL SECURITY RESTS ON THE EXPLOITATION OF THE POOR.
STUDENTS ARE SYSTEMATICALLY ISOLATED FROM THE WORLD AROUND THEM, AS THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN BEFORE, NOT ONLY IN THEIR LIFESTYLES BUT IN THEIR STUDIES. THE ANALYSIS OF NEW ARTFORMS (LIKE RAP MUSIC) AND NEW, REVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENTS IN OLD ONES (AS IN DANCE) SHOULD BE THE INALIENABLE PROVINCE OF THE GENERATION THAT HAS GROWN UP STEEPED IN THEM, AS ROCK'N'ROLL WAS FOR THE BOOMERS. BUT THE STUDENT-RUN PUBLICATIONS OF THE SIXTIES AND SEVENTIES, WHICH REVELED IN SUCH CRITICAL ANALYSES OF CONTEMPORARY ART AND CULTURE, HAVE DISAPPEARED; THEY HAVE BEEN COLONIZED BY CULTURAL STUDIES; THE MILQUETOAST MUMBLING OF CHILDREN OF THE 50S AND 60S USING THEORIES OF THE 70S AND 80S TO MISREAD A CULTURE THAT WAS STILL SITTING AT THE BACK OF THE BUS WHEN THEY ENTERED HIGH SCHOOL.
TODAY, IN THE IMPERIAL FORTRESSES OF OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES, IF YOU WANT TO EXPERIENCE YOUTH CULTURE, YOU SIGN UP TO LEARN IT FROM A MINCING WHITE PhD IN A $1200 COURSE CALLED "BALLERS AND B-GIRLS: HIP-HOP, YOUTH IDENTITIES AND THE TRANSGRESSIVE POLITICS OF LANGUAGE." GONE IS THE ULTIMATE HUMANIZING EXPERIENCE: VISCERAL INVOLVEMENT WITH THE PRESENT. THE WORLD IS ONLY AVAILABLE PRECHEWED; MASHED WITH THE CAREERISM OF MIDDLE-AGED MEN AND WOMEN AND REGURGITATED INTO THE SQUEALING MOUTHS OF OLD CHILDREN WHO HAVE MISTAKEN THEMSELVES FOR YOUNG ADULTS. IN FLAPPING TO BECOME HISTORIANS OF THE PRESENT, OUR PROFESSORS HAVE FORSAKEN THEIR AUTHENTIC RESPONSIBILITIES AS GUARDIANS OF OUR RICH AND COMPLEX PAST. THEY ARE BARELY TREADING WATER IN THE GREAT RIVER OF HUMAN HISTORY, AND, IF YOU GET TOO CLOSE, THEY WILL PULL YOU DOWN WITH THEM.
EVERY YEAR AT COMMENCEMENTS AND WELCOMING CEREMONIES THE WORLD OVER, BEGINNING AND GRADUATING STUDENTS ARE TOLD THAT THEY HAVE PARTICIPATED, OR ARE ABOUT TO PARTICIPATE, IN THE STREAM OF LEARNING THAT PASSED FROM THE GREEKS AND ROMANS THROUGH THE GREAT SCHOLARS OF THE ISLAMIC GOLDEN AGE TO THE MONASTIC ORDERS OF THE MIDDLE AGES, AND FROM THERE TO THE HEIGHTS OF EUROPEAN INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN THE RENAISSANCE, WHOSE SURVIVAL IN THE ENLIGHTENMENT ACADEMY HAS LEAD TO THE MODERN WESTERN COLLEGE EDUCATION. IT IS AN OUTRAGEOUS AND BAREFACED LIE. THE CONTEMPORARY ACADEMIC SCENE BEARS NO RELATION TO THE HISTORY IT SO EAGERLY CLAIMS AND SO RARELY KNOWS. THE STREAM IS DRY.
THE FIRST WESTERN UNIVERSITIES, THE LYCEUM OF ARISTOTLE AND PLATO'S ACADEMY, WERE PLACES OF WORSHIP. BOTH WERE BUILT IN SACRED GROVES, ONE APOLLO'S AND THE OTHER ATHENA'S: ART AND WISDOM. THERE WERE NO FEES, NO TIMETABLES, NO ASSESSMENTS AND NO GRADES. NO TENURE, NO PUBLICATION, NO PAY. CERTAINLY NO GRADUATION: JUST PEOPLE READING AND TALKING TO EACH OTHER ABOUT THINGS THEY FOUND INTERESTING -- HOW DO YOU GRADUATE FROM THINKING?
NO SURPRISE, PERHAPS, THAT IT WAS THE BRUTE-BRAINED, OLD-MONEY CAREERIST SULLA WHO TORE THOSE OLIVE TREES UP THREE CENTURIES LATER, GRINDING ALL THE GLORY OF ATHENS' GOLDEN PAST TO DUST WITH WHICH TO GILT HIS BLOODY PRESENT. INDEED, IT WOULD TAKE A SYSTEM LIKE LATE-REPUBLICAN ROME TO PRODUCE SUCH A CRETIN: A SOCIETY WHERE STATUS WAS AWARDED BY ADVANCEMENT UP THE CURSUS HONORUM, WHERE SUCH ADVANCEMENT COULD ONLY BE ATTAINED WITH AGE, WITH BOUGHT FRIENDS, WITH PHANTOM PRESTIGE AND MEANINGLESS ACCOLADES; WHERE SUCCESS MEANT CONSEQUENCE-FREE FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION OF THE PEOPLE YOU WERE SENT TO LEAD AND GOVERN; WHERE THE GREAT MAN WAS THE SKILLFUL LIAR, THE ONE MOST WILLING TO FLATTER HIS SUPERIORS AND SLAUGHTER HIS RIVALS...
IT IS CLEAR THAT THE MODERN ACADEMY IS ALSO DESTINED FOR A FALL. WITH ITS CLUBS AND CLASSES FOR STUDENTS AND ITS CONFERENCES AND CAREERISM FOR TEACHERS, IT IS COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE AS A METHOD OF LEARNING. YOU CANNOT LEARN SOCIALLY. LEARNING IS SOLITUDE. ONLY AFTER SILENT YEARS IN THE LIBRARY CAN YOU COME FORTH AND SPEAK OF WHAT YOU KNOW. WHAT YOU GET FROM A GREAT BOOK, A GREAT PAINTING, YOU CAN'T GET SECONDHAND. YOU CAN'T WIN IT IN AN EXAM ROOM AND YOU CERTAINLY CAN'T BUY IT BY THE CREDIT-HOUR. WHAT YOU LEARN IN A LECTURE HALL YOU WILL NEVER GENUINELY POSSESS; IT IS TOO GRUBBY WITH THE HANDS OF OTHER PEOPLE. LEARNING SOMETHING IN A CLASSROOM IS LIKE SITTING DOWN ON A PUBLIC TOILET AND FINDING THE SEAT ALREADY WARM.
THEREFORE STUDENT: I TELL THEE THAT WHEN THOU LEARNEST, THOU SHALT NOT BE AS THE HYPOCRITES ARE, FOR THEY LOVE TO LEARN BLABBERING IN THEIR CLASSROOMS AND CLUB MEETINGS. FUCK YOUR EXTRACURRICS. FUCK YOUR 4.0. LAY NOT UP FOR YOURSELVES TREASURES ON EARTH.
FOR THOSE OF YOU HIGHER UP IN ACADEMIA, TAKE YOUR CANDLE OUT FROM UNDER THAT FUCKING BUSHEL. YOU ARE BUILT FOR BETTER THINGS THAN PANDERING TO TEENAGERS AND ADDING LINES TO YOUR CV. WRITE NOT VAIN REPETITIONS, AS THE CONFERENCE-HOPPERS DO: FOR THEY THINK THAT THEY SHALL BE HEARD FOR THEIR MUCH SPEAKING. STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW PEOPLE SEE THE HUMANITIES AS USELESS AND START BEING USEFUL. YOU ARE THE SALT OF THE EARTH, BUT IF THE SALT HATH LOST ITS SAVOUR, THEN IT IS GOOD FOR NOTHING, AND IT SHOULD BE TRODDEN UNDER THE FOOT OF MEN. EXCEPT YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS SHALL EXCEED THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, YE SHALL IN NO CASE ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.
THE BLIND CARNIVAL OF MODERN EDUCATION WILL DANCE ITSELF OFF A CLIFF. WHEN THE STUDENT LOAN SYSTEM COLLAPSES, AS IS ABSOLUTELY INEVITABLE, THE COLLEGE WILL CRUMBLE, AND EVERY PERSON IT HAS EMPLOYED OR PRETENDED TO EDUCATE WILL SUFFER FOR IT. IT HAS BUILT ITS HOUSE UPON THE SAND. THE RAIN SHALL DESCEND. THE FLOODS SHALL COME. THE WINDS SHALL BLOW AND BEAT UPON THAT HOUSE, AND IT SHALL FALL.
AND GREAT WILL BE THE FALL OF IT.
IT'S PROBABLY CLEAR THAT MOST OF THE PROBLEMS RAISED IN THE LAST WEEK COULD BE APPLIED TO MANY DISCIPLINES WITHIN THE HUMANITIES IN CURRENT HIGHER EDUCATION. IT MAY BE THAT THE PROBLEM IS NOT SO MUCH THE ENGLISH MAJOR AS THE ENGLISH MAJOR. SOMETHING IS SICK IN OUR UNIVERSITIES AND STUDENTS OF ENGLISH ARE LIKELY JUST VICTIMS OF THE PLAGUE.
WHEN ONE LOOKS AT THE RUNNING OF THE MODERN COLLEGE IT IS CLEAR THAT ITS AIMS ARE DIRECTLY AT ODDS WITH TEACHING STUDENTS TO ENGAGE WITH THE WORLD -- PAST, PRESENT OR FUTURE. THIS IS BUILT INTO THE SIMPLEST POLICIES AND FACILITIES. THE MASSIVELY-PROFITABLE DINING HALL MEANS MANY STUDENTS NEVER LEARN TO PREPARE FOOD FOR THEMSELVES, PROBABLY THE MOST PSYCHOLOGICALLY-IMPORTANT AND VITAL SKILL IN THE TRANSITION FROM CHILDHOOD TO ADULT INDEPENDENCE. CRIPPLING FEES KEEP STUDENTS IN FINANCIAL SERFDOM TO THEIR PARENTS AND TO BANKS, AND TUITION-AND-BOARD PACKAGES PROTECT THEM FROM EVERYDAY TRIVIALITIES LIKE BALANCING A BUDGET TO COVER GROCERIES, UTILITIES PAYMENTS, MEDICAL BILLS. HONOUR COUNCILS AND SPECIALIZED CAMPUS POLICE EXIST NOT ONLY TO PROTECT THEIR INSTITUTION'S REPUTATION, BUT TO PROTECT RICH WHITE TEENAGERS FROM THE SOCIETAL CONSEQUENCES OF IRRESPONSIBLE AND ILLEGAL ACTIONS, A SERVICE AFFORDED TO NO OTHER YOUTH DEMOGRAPHIC. OUR STUDENTS ARE DELIBERATELY TRAPPED IN ARTIFICIAL INFANCY.
THEIR TEACHERS ARE NO BETTER. THE PROFESSORS OF TODAY ARE SHEER PARODY OF THE GREAT SCHOLARS OF THE FIRST HALF OF LAST CENTURY. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO READ SCHOLARSHIP FROM THE 1860S THROUGH TO THE LATE 1950S AND NOT FEEL THE TREMENDOUS LOSS OUR DARK AGE HAS SUFFERED. THERE IS A CLEAR AND OMNIPRESENT ASSUMPTION IN THESE WORKS THAT A SCHOLAR IS A PERSON WHO KNOWS BY HEART EUROPEAN CULTURAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY IN DEPTH AND ACROSS ALL PERIODS, WHO HAS READING FLUENCY IN GREEK, LATIN, FRENCH, GERMAN AND ITALIAN, WHO IS A JUDICIOUS AND LEARNED CRITIC OF MUSIC, DRAMA, LITERATURE AND PAINTING. NOW THIS SEEMS LIKE AN IMPOSSIBLE DREAM. IT IS THE WORK OF A DOCTORATE TO GAIN BASIC EXPERTISE IN ANY ONE OF THESE TOPICS -- THERE ARE TOO MANY CONFERENCES TO ATTEND TO WASTE TIME PORING OVER HISTORY BOOKS, TOO MANY TEN-PAGE ARTICLES TO CRANK OUT TO BOTHER WITH ANOTHER LANGUAGE.
WHEN A DICTATOR COMES TO POWER IT IS TRADITIONAL FOR HIM TO KILL INTELLECTUALS. THIS TRAIL OF BLOOD RUNS FROM CICERO'S HANDS ON THE ROSTRA TO THE PURGES IN ITALY, RUSSIA AND GERMANY IN THE EARLIER PART OF LAST CENTURY, AND IN IRAN, CAMBODIA AND CHILE IN THE LATTER PART. AND YET IT IS DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE, IN OUR CENTURY, HOW ANYBODY COULD CONSIDER THE UNIVERSITY A POLITICAL THREAT. WE ARE TAUGHT BY AND TAUGHT TO BE THE MOST HARMLESS, INCOMPETENT AND INACTIVE THINKERS THE WORLD HAS EVER SEEN. THE FEW SCHOLARS WHO ARE LEARNED IN WORLD HISTORY AND POLITICS ARE ENGAGED IN WRITING MINI-ESSAYS FOR AN AUDIENCE OF TEN. THE ONLY THING APPROACHING POLITICAL IDEOLOGY ON OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES IS A SMUG, DETACHED, PARALYZED AND AHISTORICAL LIBERAL PARANOIA, FOR THAT IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE RATIONALIZATION AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE WHOSE FINANCIAL SECURITY RESTS ON THE EXPLOITATION OF THE POOR.
STUDENTS ARE SYSTEMATICALLY ISOLATED FROM THE WORLD AROUND THEM, AS THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN BEFORE, NOT ONLY IN THEIR LIFESTYLES BUT IN THEIR STUDIES. THE ANALYSIS OF NEW ARTFORMS (LIKE RAP MUSIC) AND NEW, REVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENTS IN OLD ONES (AS IN DANCE) SHOULD BE THE INALIENABLE PROVINCE OF THE GENERATION THAT HAS GROWN UP STEEPED IN THEM, AS ROCK'N'ROLL WAS FOR THE BOOMERS. BUT THE STUDENT-RUN PUBLICATIONS OF THE SIXTIES AND SEVENTIES, WHICH REVELED IN SUCH CRITICAL ANALYSES OF CONTEMPORARY ART AND CULTURE, HAVE DISAPPEARED; THEY HAVE BEEN COLONIZED BY CULTURAL STUDIES; THE MILQUETOAST MUMBLING OF CHILDREN OF THE 50S AND 60S USING THEORIES OF THE 70S AND 80S TO MISREAD A CULTURE THAT WAS STILL SITTING AT THE BACK OF THE BUS WHEN THEY ENTERED HIGH SCHOOL.
TODAY, IN THE IMPERIAL FORTRESSES OF OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES, IF YOU WANT TO EXPERIENCE YOUTH CULTURE, YOU SIGN UP TO LEARN IT FROM A MINCING WHITE PhD IN A $1200 COURSE CALLED "BALLERS AND B-GIRLS: HIP-HOP, YOUTH IDENTITIES AND THE TRANSGRESSIVE POLITICS OF LANGUAGE." GONE IS THE ULTIMATE HUMANIZING EXPERIENCE: VISCERAL INVOLVEMENT WITH THE PRESENT. THE WORLD IS ONLY AVAILABLE PRECHEWED; MASHED WITH THE CAREERISM OF MIDDLE-AGED MEN AND WOMEN AND REGURGITATED INTO THE SQUEALING MOUTHS OF OLD CHILDREN WHO HAVE MISTAKEN THEMSELVES FOR YOUNG ADULTS. IN FLAPPING TO BECOME HISTORIANS OF THE PRESENT, OUR PROFESSORS HAVE FORSAKEN THEIR AUTHENTIC RESPONSIBILITIES AS GUARDIANS OF OUR RICH AND COMPLEX PAST. THEY ARE BARELY TREADING WATER IN THE GREAT RIVER OF HUMAN HISTORY, AND, IF YOU GET TOO CLOSE, THEY WILL PULL YOU DOWN WITH THEM.
EVERY YEAR AT COMMENCEMENTS AND WELCOMING CEREMONIES THE WORLD OVER, BEGINNING AND GRADUATING STUDENTS ARE TOLD THAT THEY HAVE PARTICIPATED, OR ARE ABOUT TO PARTICIPATE, IN THE STREAM OF LEARNING THAT PASSED FROM THE GREEKS AND ROMANS THROUGH THE GREAT SCHOLARS OF THE ISLAMIC GOLDEN AGE TO THE MONASTIC ORDERS OF THE MIDDLE AGES, AND FROM THERE TO THE HEIGHTS OF EUROPEAN INTELLECTUAL ACHIEVEMENT IN THE RENAISSANCE, WHOSE SURVIVAL IN THE ENLIGHTENMENT ACADEMY HAS LEAD TO THE MODERN WESTERN COLLEGE EDUCATION. IT IS AN OUTRAGEOUS AND BAREFACED LIE. THE CONTEMPORARY ACADEMIC SCENE BEARS NO RELATION TO THE HISTORY IT SO EAGERLY CLAIMS AND SO RARELY KNOWS. THE STREAM IS DRY.
THE FIRST WESTERN UNIVERSITIES, THE LYCEUM OF ARISTOTLE AND PLATO'S ACADEMY, WERE PLACES OF WORSHIP. BOTH WERE BUILT IN SACRED GROVES, ONE APOLLO'S AND THE OTHER ATHENA'S: ART AND WISDOM. THERE WERE NO FEES, NO TIMETABLES, NO ASSESSMENTS AND NO GRADES. NO TENURE, NO PUBLICATION, NO PAY. CERTAINLY NO GRADUATION: JUST PEOPLE READING AND TALKING TO EACH OTHER ABOUT THINGS THEY FOUND INTERESTING -- HOW DO YOU GRADUATE FROM THINKING?
NO SURPRISE, PERHAPS, THAT IT WAS THE BRUTE-BRAINED, OLD-MONEY CAREERIST SULLA WHO TORE THOSE OLIVE TREES UP THREE CENTURIES LATER, GRINDING ALL THE GLORY OF ATHENS' GOLDEN PAST TO DUST WITH WHICH TO GILT HIS BLOODY PRESENT. INDEED, IT WOULD TAKE A SYSTEM LIKE LATE-REPUBLICAN ROME TO PRODUCE SUCH A CRETIN: A SOCIETY WHERE STATUS WAS AWARDED BY ADVANCEMENT UP THE CURSUS HONORUM, WHERE SUCH ADVANCEMENT COULD ONLY BE ATTAINED WITH AGE, WITH BOUGHT FRIENDS, WITH PHANTOM PRESTIGE AND MEANINGLESS ACCOLADES; WHERE SUCCESS MEANT CONSEQUENCE-FREE FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION OF THE PEOPLE YOU WERE SENT TO LEAD AND GOVERN; WHERE THE GREAT MAN WAS THE SKILLFUL LIAR, THE ONE MOST WILLING TO FLATTER HIS SUPERIORS AND SLAUGHTER HIS RIVALS...
IT IS CLEAR THAT THE MODERN ACADEMY IS ALSO DESTINED FOR A FALL. WITH ITS CLUBS AND CLASSES FOR STUDENTS AND ITS CONFERENCES AND CAREERISM FOR TEACHERS, IT IS COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE AS A METHOD OF LEARNING. YOU CANNOT LEARN SOCIALLY. LEARNING IS SOLITUDE. ONLY AFTER SILENT YEARS IN THE LIBRARY CAN YOU COME FORTH AND SPEAK OF WHAT YOU KNOW. WHAT YOU GET FROM A GREAT BOOK, A GREAT PAINTING, YOU CAN'T GET SECONDHAND. YOU CAN'T WIN IT IN AN EXAM ROOM AND YOU CERTAINLY CAN'T BUY IT BY THE CREDIT-HOUR. WHAT YOU LEARN IN A LECTURE HALL YOU WILL NEVER GENUINELY POSSESS; IT IS TOO GRUBBY WITH THE HANDS OF OTHER PEOPLE. LEARNING SOMETHING IN A CLASSROOM IS LIKE SITTING DOWN ON A PUBLIC TOILET AND FINDING THE SEAT ALREADY WARM.
THEREFORE STUDENT: I TELL THEE THAT WHEN THOU LEARNEST, THOU SHALT NOT BE AS THE HYPOCRITES ARE, FOR THEY LOVE TO LEARN BLABBERING IN THEIR CLASSROOMS AND CLUB MEETINGS. FUCK YOUR EXTRACURRICS. FUCK YOUR 4.0. LAY NOT UP FOR YOURSELVES TREASURES ON EARTH.
FOR THOSE OF YOU HIGHER UP IN ACADEMIA, TAKE YOUR CANDLE OUT FROM UNDER THAT FUCKING BUSHEL. YOU ARE BUILT FOR BETTER THINGS THAN PANDERING TO TEENAGERS AND ADDING LINES TO YOUR CV. WRITE NOT VAIN REPETITIONS, AS THE CONFERENCE-HOPPERS DO: FOR THEY THINK THAT THEY SHALL BE HEARD FOR THEIR MUCH SPEAKING. STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW PEOPLE SEE THE HUMANITIES AS USELESS AND START BEING USEFUL. YOU ARE THE SALT OF THE EARTH, BUT IF THE SALT HATH LOST ITS SAVOUR, THEN IT IS GOOD FOR NOTHING, AND IT SHOULD BE TRODDEN UNDER THE FOOT OF MEN. EXCEPT YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS SHALL EXCEED THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, YE SHALL IN NO CASE ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.
THE BLIND CARNIVAL OF MODERN EDUCATION WILL DANCE ITSELF OFF A CLIFF. WHEN THE STUDENT LOAN SYSTEM COLLAPSES, AS IS ABSOLUTELY INEVITABLE, THE COLLEGE WILL CRUMBLE, AND EVERY PERSON IT HAS EMPLOYED OR PRETENDED TO EDUCATE WILL SUFFER FOR IT. IT HAS BUILT ITS HOUSE UPON THE SAND. THE RAIN SHALL DESCEND. THE FLOODS SHALL COME. THE WINDS SHALL BLOW AND BEAT UPON THAT HOUSE, AND IT SHALL FALL.
AND GREAT WILL BE THE FALL OF IT.
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Sigmund Freud - Civilization and Its Discontents II
"Interesting plot."
"I cannot believe that people in this day and age look at this man as anything more than a drugged out hippie from a day LONG gone by...sure he took himself seriously... but should we in this day and age? I will answer that question, for at least myself, with a resounding "NO!" he he. He was a drugged out NUT!"
"Freud seems to encourage the freedom of id (or libido) and ego ... Freud said that a community which tries to prolong the prohibition of sexual manifestation on children cannot be justified and that the phenomenon has become more evident anyway (and thus justifies the inverse? I don't think so!).
He believed that monogamous life is impossible and that only weak people who would submit to the circumscription of their sexual freedom. But has he any idea of the impact of this preposition on children? Could he imagine what would happen to children who's father AND mother date other people? Will it bring happinness to the children? But of course he only focused on the fulfillment of one's ego.
His view on 'love your neighbor as you love yourself' is awfully perverted. He translates 'Homo homini lupus' like, literally. Then he said, obstruction to the fulfillment of aggression in civilization will bring unhappiness. What kind of savaged civilization did he have in his mind, I wonder.
You know, almost every premise he got is real - they are increasingly happening. But these premises are actually the root of so many behavioral problems that gave birth to endless chain of unhappiness, not to mention a disfunction in communities. Just because there are so many people practicing something doesn't mean that it is the right thing. The notion of his statements is that there's no good in humanbeing because we are all basically super developed animals. I'm not trying to be a pious, but his judgements and views are totally destructive.
It's true that this world has fallen to such degree of immorality. But in the midst of all that, should we jump in and follow the wave to destruction?
I didn't really find anything that adds to my knowledge from this book. I found it to be negative and bleak. Imagine its impact towards the young and unexperienced youth's mind in the span of generations since its publicity forward. What a dreary future the world has."
"I cannot believe that people in this day and age look at this man as anything more than a drugged out hippie from a day LONG gone by...sure he took himself seriously... but should we in this day and age? I will answer that question, for at least myself, with a resounding "NO!" he he. He was a drugged out NUT!"
"Freud seems to encourage the freedom of id (or libido) and ego ... Freud said that a community which tries to prolong the prohibition of sexual manifestation on children cannot be justified and that the phenomenon has become more evident anyway (and thus justifies the inverse? I don't think so!).
He believed that monogamous life is impossible and that only weak people who would submit to the circumscription of their sexual freedom. But has he any idea of the impact of this preposition on children? Could he imagine what would happen to children who's father AND mother date other people? Will it bring happinness to the children? But of course he only focused on the fulfillment of one's ego.
His view on 'love your neighbor as you love yourself' is awfully perverted. He translates 'Homo homini lupus' like, literally. Then he said, obstruction to the fulfillment of aggression in civilization will bring unhappiness. What kind of savaged civilization did he have in his mind, I wonder.
You know, almost every premise he got is real - they are increasingly happening. But these premises are actually the root of so many behavioral problems that gave birth to endless chain of unhappiness, not to mention a disfunction in communities. Just because there are so many people practicing something doesn't mean that it is the right thing. The notion of his statements is that there's no good in humanbeing because we are all basically super developed animals. I'm not trying to be a pious, but his judgements and views are totally destructive.
It's true that this world has fallen to such degree of immorality. But in the midst of all that, should we jump in and follow the wave to destruction?
I didn't really find anything that adds to my knowledge from this book. I found it to be negative and bleak. Imagine its impact towards the young and unexperienced youth's mind in the span of generations since its publicity forward. What a dreary future the world has."
Monday, August 20, 2012
SPECIAL: QUARTA PHILIPPICA IN STUDENTES LITTERARUM
4. THEY DON'T LIKE BOOKS
BECAUSE THE MOST TAXING INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE REQUIRED OF AN ENGLISH UNDERGRADUATE IS TO READ FICTION AND POETRY (SOMETHING NORMAL PEOPLE OF REASONABLE INTELLIGENCE DO OF THEIR OWN ACCORD AND FOR PLEASURE), THEY ARE LIABLE TO DEVELOP DISPROPORTIONATE IDEAS OF HOW DIFFICULT A TASK THIS IS. ENGLISH MAJORS ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE EVER TOLD ME A FIVE-MONTH COLLEGE COURSE IS NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND, SAY, THE NOVELS OF WILLIAM FAULKNER.
WHAT THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM ADDS TO STUDYING LITERATURE I HAVE NO IDEA. YOU READ THE TEXT ON YOUR OWN. YOU GO TO A SHITTY LECTURE IN WHICH YOUR PROFESSOR SUMMARIZES (IN THE WORST CASE) THE PLOT OF THE BOOK YOU JUST READ, AND (IN THE BEST CASE) HIS OR HER OWN PUBLISHED WORK WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE LIBRARY. OCCASIONALLY THERE IS CLASS "DISCUSSION" WHICH GENERALLY BEGINS WITH THE PROFESSOR ASKING "WHAT DID YOU THINK?" AND STUDENTS ANSWERING "HURR DURR THE LANGUAGE WAS HARD" OR, AT THE VERY BEST, "I REALLY ENJOYED THE CHARACTERIZATION!" THEN THE PROFESSOR WILL PUT FORTH, IN A MANGLED, REDUCED VERSION SUITABLE FOR UNDERGRADUATES, THE WRITTEN ARGUMENT OF ANOTHER SCHOLAR, WHICH IS, AGAIN, SOMETHING YOU COULD HAVE LEARNT IN PRIVATE, BETTER, AND FOR FREE, AT THE LIBRARY. SO WHY DIDN'T YOU, MORON? WHY ARE YOU CHOOSING, AND PAYING, TO DO YOUR READING WITH A BRAYING, STINKING MOB OF TEENAGERS? WHAT DO YOU GET OUT OF THIS SYSTEM THAT IS WORTH HOBBLING YOURSELF WITH DECADES OF DEBT?
THERE IS ONLY ONE ANSWER: ENGLISH MAJORS HATE READING AND NEED TO BE FORCED TO DO IT. THERE IS A REASON ENGLISH MAJORS WILL SPEND HOURS ARGUING WITH EACH OTHER ABOUT WHETHER READING ON A KINDLE "COUNTS", OR RHAPSODIZING ON THE SMELL OF OLD BOOKS: IT'S BECAUSE THE MOMENT THEY SHUT UP, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STOP INHALING THEIR COPY OF MOBY-DICK AND ACTUALLY GET TO READING THE FUCKING THING. PREDICTABLY, ENGLISH MAJORS ARE THE ONLY ONES CONVINCED BY THIS CHARADE -- AND THE PEOPLE TEACHING THEM ARE WELL AWARE OF HOW EXPLOITABLE IT MAKES THEM.
IN ALL DISCIPLINES, THE PRESTIGE OF HIGHER EDUCATION HAS OUTLIVED ITS RIGOUR AND EFFECTIVENESS. GOING TO COLLEGE IS STILL EQUATED WITH GETTING AN EDUCATION, BUT UNIVERSITIES HAVE LONG SINCE REALIZED THAT IT'S FAR MORE PROFITABLE TO PROVIDE A 4-YEAR BABYSITTING SERVICE FOR ADULTS THAN IT IS TO PROVIDE THAT EDUCATION. TUITION CLIMBS, FULL PROFESSORSHIPS DWINDLE; CAMPUSES SPROUT EXPENSIVE GYMS, STADIUMS, DINING HALLS, MULTIMEDIA CENTRES, SEMESTERS AT SEA. GRADES INFLATE, FOUR-YEAR DEGREES STRETCH INTO THEIR FIFTH AND SIXTH, WITH A GAP YEAR SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY (FOR A BREAK FROM THE MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL STRAINS OF COLLEGE LIFE, WHAT WITH ITS READING AND WRITING AND 10 HOURS OF CLASS A WEEK). THEREFORE IT MAKES SENSE THAT A DEGREE IN ENGLISH IS STRUCTURED NOT, AS ONE MIGHT EXPECT, AROUND READING LITERATURE, BUT AROUND AVOIDING LITERATURE.
TAKE A LOOK AT AN UNDERGRADUATE ENGLISH SYLLABUS: YOU'LL FIND THINGS LIKE "DIGITAL LITERATURES", "CLASSIC WORKS AS FILM ADAPTATIONS", "HISTORY OF THE GRAPHIC NOVEL". THRILLED WITH THE CHANCE TO EARN CREDIT FOR READING THE SAME CHILDREN'S BOOKS THEY HAVE BEEN READING SINCE THE AGE OF EIGHT, ENGLISH MAJORS FLOCK TO COURSES LIKE "THE WORLD OF HARRY POTTER: A CRITICAL CROSS-DISCIPLINARY EXAMINATION," WHERE, I PRESUME, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO UTILIZE ALL THAT CROSS-DISCIPLINARY KNOWLEDGE AND CRITICAL APTITUDE THEY HAVE. THE PROBLEM HERE IS NOT THE SUBJECTS, WHICH ARE PRESUMABLY WORTHY OF SERIOUS STUDY IN SOME CAPACITY -- IT IS THAT THESE COURSES ARE NOT DESIGNED TO BE SERIOUS STUDIES. THEY ARE DESIGNED TO KEEP STUDENT NUMBERS UP, TO KEEP GPAS UP, TO KEEP GRADUATION STATISTICS UP. ENGLISH DEPARTMENTS ARE HIGHLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO COLLEGE-WIDE BUDGET CUTS, AND UNLESS THEY CAN PROVE THEMSELVES TO BE "RELEVANT TO STUDENTS" TO THE MBAS ON THE COLLEGE BOARD, THE PEOPLE TEACHING THESE ENGLISH COURSES WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS.
BUT NOT ONLY ARE PROFESSORS OF ENGLISH BUSY DEVISING THESE TRENDY COURSES, THEY ARE DESPERATELY SEEKING JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THEIR OWN INCAPACITY FOR LITERATURE. WE TALKED LAST TIME ABOUT THE CONFUSION OF WORDS WITH REALITY IN ENGLISH DEPARTMENTS. ONCE AN ENGLISH MAJOR HAS BEEN LYING, FAKING, PRETENDING TO BE INTERESTED, FOR THE BETTER PART OF 25 YEARS, THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN ASSERTION AND EXPRESSION HAS ENTIRELY DISAPPEARED: THE HORRIFYING RESULT IS THE ENGLISH PROFESSOR. THIS FINAL FORM OF ENGLISH MAJOR IS NO LONGER BOUND BY THE LAWS OF CONTRADICTION. HE OR SHE GAINS MANY OCCULT, SEEMINGLY PARADOXICAL POWERS: FOR INSTANCE, THE PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH CAN DRAW A $150,000 SALARY FOR HIS WORK AS A LEADING THEORIST OF MARXISM.
THE GREATEST, MOST FANTASTIC ILLUSION THE PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH CHERISHES IS THAT "RADICAL ACTIVISM" IS POSSIBLE WITHIN THE CONFINES OF AN ACADEMIC CAREER. IT IS NO SURPRISE THAT THESE PEOPLE, WHO HAVE NEVER FACED DOWN A RANK OF RIOT POLICE, NEVER BEEN BEATEN OR IMPRISONED OR IN FACT RECEIVED ANYTHING BUT JOURNAL CITATIONS AND TENURE FOR THEIR BELIEFS, SERIOUSLY THINK THAT ONE CAN SHAKE THE FOUNDATIONS OF CAPITALISM, OF PATRIARCHY, OF RACISM, FROM BEHIND A MAHOGANY DESK THAT IS CLEANED NIGHTLY BY JANITORIAL STAFF. THEIR JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS OUTRAGEOUS MISCONCEPTION IS A WONDER TO BEHOLD.
THE LINE IS THAT THE STRUCTURE OF ACADEMIA, ESPECIALLY IN ENGLISH, WHICH FOCUSES ON A CANON OF CLASSIC WORKS, IS INHERENTLY RACIST, SEXIST AND CLASSIST, AND THEREFORE MUST BE RESISTED. IT IS A SPLENDID RECONCILIATION OF JAW-DROPPING IGNORANCE WITH ABSOLUTELY RISIBLE CLAIMS TO POLITICAL CONSCIOUSNESS -- THE ONE JUSTIFIES THE OTHER. THE THREE-THOUSAND YEAR HISTORY OF WESTERN THOUGHT BECOMES A PARADE OF "DEAD WHITE MEN" WHICH WOULD BE OPPRESSIVE EVEN TO TEACH. THERE IS GREAT JUSTICE TO THE CLAIM THAT WESTERN ACADEMIA IS PROVINCIAL AND MYOPIC, BUT THIS LOSS OF CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL TRAINING IS NOT REPLACED BY STUDIES IN THE GREAT CIVILIZATIONS OF AFRICA, EAST ASIA, INDIA AND THE MIDDLE EAST. IT IS REPLACED BY THE FLUFF COURSES DISCUSSED ABOVE.
THUS, THE ENGLISH MAJOR IS NOT ONLY GROOMED TO BE HOPELESSLY BARREN OF ALL KNOWLEDGE OF ANY CULTURE, INCLUDING THAT OF THE WEST, HE OR SHE IS OFTEN TRAINED TO BE ACTIVELY CONTEMPTUOUS OF SUCH KNOWLEDGE. UPPER-MIDDLE-CLASS PEOPLE WITH SECURE, SEDENTARY JOBS DESIGNED SO THAT THE ADULT CHILDREN OF OTHER UPPER-MIDDLE-CLASS PEOPLE CAN PARTY FOR FOUR CONSECUTIVE YEARS, MINIMUM, WHILE THEIR MEALS ARE PREPARED AND THEIR TOILETS ARE SCRUBBED BY AN UNDERPAID SERVANT-CLASS OF THE WORKING POOR -- THESE PEOPLE HAVE THE INCOMPREHENSIBLE GALL TO SAY PLATO AND DANTE ARE THE ILLNESS IN OUR CULTURE, THAT THE REASON MINORITY GROUPS FEEL VOICELESS AND UNDERREPRESENTED IN ACADEMIA IS THAT WE MAKE THEM READ SHAKESPEARE.
IF YOU ENJOY TELLING PEOPLE YOU LOVE TO READ, BUT YOU DON'T WANT TO READ ANY BORING PHILOSOPHY OR HISTORY, AND REALLY WHAT YOU MOSTLY MEAN IS "I LOVE READING AMATEUR EROTIC FICTION ABOUT DOCTOR WHO," AND YOU'VE NEVER READ ANY OF THE MAJOR AUTHORS IN YOUR OWN LANGUAGE, AND YOU DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO READ THEM WITHOUT SOMEBODY STANDING OVER YOU WITH A GRADEBOOK SAYING "DO IT", BUT YOU ALSO NEED AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE YOU CAN SKIP ABOUT HALF THE READING AND STILL GET A DECENT GRADE BECAUSE YOU'RE A BIT LAZY, AND YOU WANT TO WRITE YOUR THESIS ON SOMETHING LIKE "PERFORMANCES OF GENDER IN A SHITTY COMIC BOOK I READ BEFORE I ARRIVED AT COLLEGE", AND, FINALLY, YOU'D LIKE TO BE CONGRATULATED AND RESPECTED BY YOUR PEERS WHEN YOU TELL THEM ABOUT YOUR ARTFUL DODGES OF THE SYSTEM YOU ARE PAYING TO EDUCATE YOU, I'M VERY SORRY TO INFORM YOU THAT ENGLISH IS THE APPROPRIATE COURSE FOR YOU.
BECAUSE THE MOST TAXING INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE REQUIRED OF AN ENGLISH UNDERGRADUATE IS TO READ FICTION AND POETRY (SOMETHING NORMAL PEOPLE OF REASONABLE INTELLIGENCE DO OF THEIR OWN ACCORD AND FOR PLEASURE), THEY ARE LIABLE TO DEVELOP DISPROPORTIONATE IDEAS OF HOW DIFFICULT A TASK THIS IS. ENGLISH MAJORS ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE EVER TOLD ME A FIVE-MONTH COLLEGE COURSE IS NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND, SAY, THE NOVELS OF WILLIAM FAULKNER.
WHAT THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM ADDS TO STUDYING LITERATURE I HAVE NO IDEA. YOU READ THE TEXT ON YOUR OWN. YOU GO TO A SHITTY LECTURE IN WHICH YOUR PROFESSOR SUMMARIZES (IN THE WORST CASE) THE PLOT OF THE BOOK YOU JUST READ, AND (IN THE BEST CASE) HIS OR HER OWN PUBLISHED WORK WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE LIBRARY. OCCASIONALLY THERE IS CLASS "DISCUSSION" WHICH GENERALLY BEGINS WITH THE PROFESSOR ASKING "WHAT DID YOU THINK?" AND STUDENTS ANSWERING "HURR DURR THE LANGUAGE WAS HARD" OR, AT THE VERY BEST, "I REALLY ENJOYED THE CHARACTERIZATION!" THEN THE PROFESSOR WILL PUT FORTH, IN A MANGLED, REDUCED VERSION SUITABLE FOR UNDERGRADUATES, THE WRITTEN ARGUMENT OF ANOTHER SCHOLAR, WHICH IS, AGAIN, SOMETHING YOU COULD HAVE LEARNT IN PRIVATE, BETTER, AND FOR FREE, AT THE LIBRARY. SO WHY DIDN'T YOU, MORON? WHY ARE YOU CHOOSING, AND PAYING, TO DO YOUR READING WITH A BRAYING, STINKING MOB OF TEENAGERS? WHAT DO YOU GET OUT OF THIS SYSTEM THAT IS WORTH HOBBLING YOURSELF WITH DECADES OF DEBT?
THERE IS ONLY ONE ANSWER: ENGLISH MAJORS HATE READING AND NEED TO BE FORCED TO DO IT. THERE IS A REASON ENGLISH MAJORS WILL SPEND HOURS ARGUING WITH EACH OTHER ABOUT WHETHER READING ON A KINDLE "COUNTS", OR RHAPSODIZING ON THE SMELL OF OLD BOOKS: IT'S BECAUSE THE MOMENT THEY SHUT UP, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STOP INHALING THEIR COPY OF MOBY-DICK AND ACTUALLY GET TO READING THE FUCKING THING. PREDICTABLY, ENGLISH MAJORS ARE THE ONLY ONES CONVINCED BY THIS CHARADE -- AND THE PEOPLE TEACHING THEM ARE WELL AWARE OF HOW EXPLOITABLE IT MAKES THEM.
IN ALL DISCIPLINES, THE PRESTIGE OF HIGHER EDUCATION HAS OUTLIVED ITS RIGOUR AND EFFECTIVENESS. GOING TO COLLEGE IS STILL EQUATED WITH GETTING AN EDUCATION, BUT UNIVERSITIES HAVE LONG SINCE REALIZED THAT IT'S FAR MORE PROFITABLE TO PROVIDE A 4-YEAR BABYSITTING SERVICE FOR ADULTS THAN IT IS TO PROVIDE THAT EDUCATION. TUITION CLIMBS, FULL PROFESSORSHIPS DWINDLE; CAMPUSES SPROUT EXPENSIVE GYMS, STADIUMS, DINING HALLS, MULTIMEDIA CENTRES, SEMESTERS AT SEA. GRADES INFLATE, FOUR-YEAR DEGREES STRETCH INTO THEIR FIFTH AND SIXTH, WITH A GAP YEAR SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY (FOR A BREAK FROM THE MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL STRAINS OF COLLEGE LIFE, WHAT WITH ITS READING AND WRITING AND 10 HOURS OF CLASS A WEEK). THEREFORE IT MAKES SENSE THAT A DEGREE IN ENGLISH IS STRUCTURED NOT, AS ONE MIGHT EXPECT, AROUND READING LITERATURE, BUT AROUND AVOIDING LITERATURE.
TAKE A LOOK AT AN UNDERGRADUATE ENGLISH SYLLABUS: YOU'LL FIND THINGS LIKE "DIGITAL LITERATURES", "CLASSIC WORKS AS FILM ADAPTATIONS", "HISTORY OF THE GRAPHIC NOVEL". THRILLED WITH THE CHANCE TO EARN CREDIT FOR READING THE SAME CHILDREN'S BOOKS THEY HAVE BEEN READING SINCE THE AGE OF EIGHT, ENGLISH MAJORS FLOCK TO COURSES LIKE "THE WORLD OF HARRY POTTER: A CRITICAL CROSS-DISCIPLINARY EXAMINATION," WHERE, I PRESUME, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO UTILIZE ALL THAT CROSS-DISCIPLINARY KNOWLEDGE AND CRITICAL APTITUDE THEY HAVE. THE PROBLEM HERE IS NOT THE SUBJECTS, WHICH ARE PRESUMABLY WORTHY OF SERIOUS STUDY IN SOME CAPACITY -- IT IS THAT THESE COURSES ARE NOT DESIGNED TO BE SERIOUS STUDIES. THEY ARE DESIGNED TO KEEP STUDENT NUMBERS UP, TO KEEP GPAS UP, TO KEEP GRADUATION STATISTICS UP. ENGLISH DEPARTMENTS ARE HIGHLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO COLLEGE-WIDE BUDGET CUTS, AND UNLESS THEY CAN PROVE THEMSELVES TO BE "RELEVANT TO STUDENTS" TO THE MBAS ON THE COLLEGE BOARD, THE PEOPLE TEACHING THESE ENGLISH COURSES WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS.
BUT NOT ONLY ARE PROFESSORS OF ENGLISH BUSY DEVISING THESE TRENDY COURSES, THEY ARE DESPERATELY SEEKING JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THEIR OWN INCAPACITY FOR LITERATURE. WE TALKED LAST TIME ABOUT THE CONFUSION OF WORDS WITH REALITY IN ENGLISH DEPARTMENTS. ONCE AN ENGLISH MAJOR HAS BEEN LYING, FAKING, PRETENDING TO BE INTERESTED, FOR THE BETTER PART OF 25 YEARS, THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN ASSERTION AND EXPRESSION HAS ENTIRELY DISAPPEARED: THE HORRIFYING RESULT IS THE ENGLISH PROFESSOR. THIS FINAL FORM OF ENGLISH MAJOR IS NO LONGER BOUND BY THE LAWS OF CONTRADICTION. HE OR SHE GAINS MANY OCCULT, SEEMINGLY PARADOXICAL POWERS: FOR INSTANCE, THE PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH CAN DRAW A $150,000 SALARY FOR HIS WORK AS A LEADING THEORIST OF MARXISM.
THE GREATEST, MOST FANTASTIC ILLUSION THE PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH CHERISHES IS THAT "RADICAL ACTIVISM" IS POSSIBLE WITHIN THE CONFINES OF AN ACADEMIC CAREER. IT IS NO SURPRISE THAT THESE PEOPLE, WHO HAVE NEVER FACED DOWN A RANK OF RIOT POLICE, NEVER BEEN BEATEN OR IMPRISONED OR IN FACT RECEIVED ANYTHING BUT JOURNAL CITATIONS AND TENURE FOR THEIR BELIEFS, SERIOUSLY THINK THAT ONE CAN SHAKE THE FOUNDATIONS OF CAPITALISM, OF PATRIARCHY, OF RACISM, FROM BEHIND A MAHOGANY DESK THAT IS CLEANED NIGHTLY BY JANITORIAL STAFF. THEIR JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS OUTRAGEOUS MISCONCEPTION IS A WONDER TO BEHOLD.
THE LINE IS THAT THE STRUCTURE OF ACADEMIA, ESPECIALLY IN ENGLISH, WHICH FOCUSES ON A CANON OF CLASSIC WORKS, IS INHERENTLY RACIST, SEXIST AND CLASSIST, AND THEREFORE MUST BE RESISTED. IT IS A SPLENDID RECONCILIATION OF JAW-DROPPING IGNORANCE WITH ABSOLUTELY RISIBLE CLAIMS TO POLITICAL CONSCIOUSNESS -- THE ONE JUSTIFIES THE OTHER. THE THREE-THOUSAND YEAR HISTORY OF WESTERN THOUGHT BECOMES A PARADE OF "DEAD WHITE MEN" WHICH WOULD BE OPPRESSIVE EVEN TO TEACH. THERE IS GREAT JUSTICE TO THE CLAIM THAT WESTERN ACADEMIA IS PROVINCIAL AND MYOPIC, BUT THIS LOSS OF CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL TRAINING IS NOT REPLACED BY STUDIES IN THE GREAT CIVILIZATIONS OF AFRICA, EAST ASIA, INDIA AND THE MIDDLE EAST. IT IS REPLACED BY THE FLUFF COURSES DISCUSSED ABOVE.
THUS, THE ENGLISH MAJOR IS NOT ONLY GROOMED TO BE HOPELESSLY BARREN OF ALL KNOWLEDGE OF ANY CULTURE, INCLUDING THAT OF THE WEST, HE OR SHE IS OFTEN TRAINED TO BE ACTIVELY CONTEMPTUOUS OF SUCH KNOWLEDGE. UPPER-MIDDLE-CLASS PEOPLE WITH SECURE, SEDENTARY JOBS DESIGNED SO THAT THE ADULT CHILDREN OF OTHER UPPER-MIDDLE-CLASS PEOPLE CAN PARTY FOR FOUR CONSECUTIVE YEARS, MINIMUM, WHILE THEIR MEALS ARE PREPARED AND THEIR TOILETS ARE SCRUBBED BY AN UNDERPAID SERVANT-CLASS OF THE WORKING POOR -- THESE PEOPLE HAVE THE INCOMPREHENSIBLE GALL TO SAY PLATO AND DANTE ARE THE ILLNESS IN OUR CULTURE, THAT THE REASON MINORITY GROUPS FEEL VOICELESS AND UNDERREPRESENTED IN ACADEMIA IS THAT WE MAKE THEM READ SHAKESPEARE.
IF YOU ENJOY TELLING PEOPLE YOU LOVE TO READ, BUT YOU DON'T WANT TO READ ANY BORING PHILOSOPHY OR HISTORY, AND REALLY WHAT YOU MOSTLY MEAN IS "I LOVE READING AMATEUR EROTIC FICTION ABOUT DOCTOR WHO," AND YOU'VE NEVER READ ANY OF THE MAJOR AUTHORS IN YOUR OWN LANGUAGE, AND YOU DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO READ THEM WITHOUT SOMEBODY STANDING OVER YOU WITH A GRADEBOOK SAYING "DO IT", BUT YOU ALSO NEED AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE YOU CAN SKIP ABOUT HALF THE READING AND STILL GET A DECENT GRADE BECAUSE YOU'RE A BIT LAZY, AND YOU WANT TO WRITE YOUR THESIS ON SOMETHING LIKE "PERFORMANCES OF GENDER IN A SHITTY COMIC BOOK I READ BEFORE I ARRIVED AT COLLEGE", AND, FINALLY, YOU'D LIKE TO BE CONGRATULATED AND RESPECTED BY YOUR PEERS WHEN YOU TELL THEM ABOUT YOUR ARTFUL DODGES OF THE SYSTEM YOU ARE PAYING TO EDUCATE YOU, I'M VERY SORRY TO INFORM YOU THAT ENGLISH IS THE APPROPRIATE COURSE FOR YOU.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Max Weber - The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
"an insult to anyone who takes books seriously."
"damn i hate Max Weber and his Proestant Ethic bullshit."
"just a series of pseudo-mystical platitudes"
"I'm a christian.
Now I have an Xbox 360, PS3, Wii, Nintendo DSi, PC, PS2, Gamecube, Gba, Gbc, and a bunch of other fun stuff!
Thank you jesus!"
"The idea that God brings you economic success (and by extension an omnipresent repression of success for others) is because you are part of his 'elite.' It's a Calvinist principle. They believe in predestination, so basically if you are doing well, it's because God wants you to and that makes it okay. Max Weber actually supported that ridiculous belief in his book."
"damn i hate Max Weber and his Proestant Ethic bullshit."
"just a series of pseudo-mystical platitudes"
"I'm a christian.
Now I have an Xbox 360, PS3, Wii, Nintendo DSi, PC, PS2, Gamecube, Gba, Gbc, and a bunch of other fun stuff!
Thank you jesus!"
"The idea that God brings you economic success (and by extension an omnipresent repression of success for others) is because you are part of his 'elite.' It's a Calvinist principle. They believe in predestination, so basically if you are doing well, it's because God wants you to and that makes it okay. Max Weber actually supported that ridiculous belief in his book."
Saturday, August 18, 2012
SPECIAL: TERTIA PHILIPPICA IN STUDENTES LITTERARUM
3. THEY LIVE IN AND PERPETUATE A CULTURE OF FRAUD
ALL STUDENTS OF ENGLISH WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY'RE INTERESTED IN LITERATURE, OR, IF THEY'RE A REAL PRICK, THAT THEY'RE "PASSIONATE" ABOUT IT. BUT PROFESSING INTEREST IS NOT THE SAME AS DEMONSTRATING INTEREST. PROFESSING INTEREST IS A WAY OF ASSOCIATING YOUR PERSONAL BRAND WITH A CERTAIN ACTIVITY WITHOUT ACTUALLY HAVING TO PARTAKE IN THAT ACTIVITY. DEMONSTRATING INTEREST IS NOT AN ASSERTION BUT AN ACTION: IT MEANS DOING THE SHIT YOU'RE SO PASSIONATE ABOUT. THE MOST OBVIOUS AND MOST MEASURABLE BEHAVIOUR ASSOCIATED WITH AN INTEREST IN LITERATURE IS READING LITERATURE -- FOR THIS REASON IT IS SURPRISING TO DISCOVER HOW LITTLE ANY GIVEN ENGLISH MAJOR HAS READ.
THIS CONFUSION BETWEEN PROFESSED AND DEMONSTRATED INTEREST IS THE CHARACTERISTIC TRAIT OF ENGLISH MAJORS THE WORLD OVER. THEY WILL TELL YOU THEY'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT LANGUAGE -- WHEN THEY KNOW NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT ANY LANGUAGE. THEY WILL HAPPILY BLEAT THEIR OPINION ON DOZENS OF BOOKS THEY HAVE NEVER EVEN OPENED, AND REACT WITH BAFFLEMENT IF YOU CALL THEM ON IT. IT IS NOT THAT THEY ARE LYING DELIBERATELY. THEY DON'T SEEM TO REALIZE THAT THEY ARE LYING AT ALL: IT IS AS THOUGH THEY ARE MISSING THE MECHANISM FOR DISTINGUISHING A LIE FROM THE TRUTH.
WELL, MY FRIENDS, THAT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE. SOMETHING HAS BEEN PICKLED IN THEIR BRAINS, AND THEY HAVE FORGOTTEN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WORDS AND THINGS, BETWEEN SAYING AND DOING. THIS DISEASED SORT OF THINKING IS INEVITABLE, BECAUSE AN EDUCATION IN ENGLISH IS A LONG AND UNINTERRUPTED TRAINING IN EFFECTIVE FRAUD.
THE STANDARD OF ASSESSMENT IN ENGLISH STUDIES IS THE PERSUASIVE ESSAY. FROM HIGH SCHOOL ON, USEFUL LEARNING TECHNIQUES LIKE ROTE MEMORIZATION AND MASTERY OF SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS ARE CONFINED TO MATHEMATICS, HISTORY, AND THE SCIENCES. THE ONLY SKILL ROUTINELY TESTED IN ENGLISH IS THE ABILITY TO WRITE A FORMALLY-STRUCTURED ESSAY ATTEMPTING TO PROVE OR DISPROVE A THESIS THE STUDENT IS UTTERLY UNQUALIFIED TO JUDGE. SKILLFUL MANIPULATION OF LANGUAGE AND SKILLFUL DISGUISAL OF IGNORANCE ARE WHAT OTHER DISCIPLINES WOULD CALL SOPHISTRY -- BUT SOPHISTRY IS THE PRIZED SKILL IN ENGLISH. CHILDREN WHO CAN WRITE WELL ARE ALLOWED TO COAST WITHOUT COMPLETING THEIR WORK: WE ALL HAD FRIENDS IN HIGH SCHOOL WHO GOT PERFECT MARKS IN ENGLISH CLASS WITHOUT HAVING READ THE SET BOOKS, AND WHEN BEHAVIOUR LIKE THAT IS REWARDED, IT BECOMES HABITUAL. WE TEACH THE BRIGHT STUDENTS THAT TO LIE IS NOT ONLY A PERMISSIBLE WAY OF GETTING OUT OF WORK, BUT ACTUALLY A LAUDABLE WAY OF EXCELLING IN THE STUDY OF ENGLISH. TO SUCCEED WHERE YOU HAVE NOT MADE AN EFFORT BECOMES A BADGE OF PRIDE, A MARK OF NATURAL INTELLIGENCE RATHER THAN LABOURED KNOWLEDGE. THIS MODE OF ASSESSMENT CONTINUES RIGHT THROUGH COLLEGE.
AN ENGLISH MAJOR WHO MAKES IT THROUGH THE FIRST ROUND OF HIS OR HER EDUCATION -- THAT IS, ONE WHO SUCCESSFULLY CONVINCES A BUNCH OF FRAUDULENT ASSHOLES THAT HE/SHE KNOWS OR CARES ABOUT LITERATURE -- IS CORDIALLY INVITED TO THE SECOND ROUND, GRADUATE SCHOOL, IN WHICH OUR YOUNG SCHOLAR CAN FINALLY GIVE UP THOSE LONG, BORING NOVELS, POEMS AND PLAYS AND START ON THE LOFTIER TASK OF CONVINCING THE SAME BUNCH OF ASSHOLES THAT HE/SHE KNOWS OR CARES ABOUT PHILOSOPHY.
SINCE PHILOSOPHY IS REALLY HARD, ENGLISH DEPARTMENTS HAVE SUBSTITUTED THEIR OWN VERSION OF IT, CALLED "CRITICAL THEORY." I DON'T INTEND TO MAKE ANY CRITIQUE HERE OF THE CENTRAL THINKERS OF THIS MOVEMENT. MY ISSUE IS THAT ENGLISH GRADUATE PROGRAMS DO NOT HAVE ANY RESPECT FOR OR DESIRE TO UNDERSTAND THE THINKERS THEY PROFESS TO STUDY. WHATEVER THE MERITS OF THE FRENCH AND GERMAN POSTWAR SET, ALL OF THEM ARE WRITING IN CONVERSATION WITH LONG AND COMPLEX INTELLECTUAL TRADITIONS. FOUCAULT'S HABIT OF SPINNING AN ESSAY OFF A MINOR WORK OF KANT, DERRIDA'S DETAILED EXAMINATION OF LITTLE-KNOWN BITS AND PIECES OF ROUSSEAU, MEAN THAT THEY CANNOT BE FULLY GRASPED OR JUDGED WITHOUT A VERY SOLID BACKGROUND IN PHILOSOPHY. THEIR CONSTANT MANIPULATION OF HISTORY REQUIRES ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY IF WE WISH TO DO ANY SORT OF CRITICAL READING. THE FOUNDATION OF VIRTUALLY ALL CRITICAL THEORY IN SAUSSUREAN THEORIES OF LANGUAGE OUGHT, SURELY, TO NECESSITATE SOME FAMILIARITY WITH LINGUISTICS. ENGLISH UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS NEITHER PROVIDE NOR REQUIRE THIS KNOWLEDGE, RESULTING IN A KNOWLEDGE GAP UPON ENTRY TO A GRADUATE PROGRAM: GRADUATE PROGRAMS DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM BY IGNORING IT.
GRAD STUDENTS IN LITERATURE ARE CONSTANTLY ASSIGNED THEORISTS WHOM THEY ARE NOT REMOTELY EQUIPPED TO UNDERSTAND OR EVALUATE. NOR ARE THEY ASKED TO MAKE ANY EFFORT TOWARDS DEVELOPING THE SKILLS NECESSARY FOR SUCH UNDERSTANDING. FOR INSTANCE, LACAN, WHOSE ENTIRE OEUVRE IS A COMMENTARY ON FREUD, WHOSE FIRST AND EXPLICIT DEMAND UPON HIS READERS IS FAMILIARITY WITH ALL OF FREUD IN THE GERMAN, IS TAUGHT TO STUDENTS WHO HAVE NEVER OPENED A SINGLE VOLUME OF FREUD AND WHO ARE NO MORE CAPABLE OF GRAPPLING WITH HIS GERMAN THAN THEY ARE OF READING LACAN IN HIS NATIVE FRENCH.
THE ENGLISH GRADUATE IS TOLD: DON'T LEARN HISTORY, DON'T LEARN PHILOSOPHY, DON'T EVEN LISTEN TO THE THINKERS YOU DO READ, EXCEPT WHEN IT'S CONVENIENT AND DOESN'T REQUIRE YOU TO DO ANY WORK. IT IS ONE OF THE MOST ANTI-INTELLECTUAL ATTITUDES AVAILABLE TO HUMAN BEINGS, FIT ONLY FOR SLIMY, CAREERIST LITTLE FUCKS WHO HATE LEARNING BUT LOVE LOOKING LEARNED -- PERFECT FOR THE ENGLISH MAJOR, IN WHOSE MIND THERE IS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN RESPECTABILITY AND INTEGRITY, BETWEEN SELF AND PERFORMANCE.
THIS, OF COURSE, EXPLAINS THE BIZARRE SATISFACTION THE STUDENT OF ENGLISH TAKES IN LECTURES AND DISCUSSIONS WITH PEERS (WHICH HAVE ALWAYS SEEMED TO ME THE WORST POSSIBLE WAY OF STUDYING BOOKS AND POEMS). THE ENGLISH DEPARTMENT, WITH ITS UNNECESSARY APPARATUS OF FELLOW STUDENTS, OF DISCUSSIONS AND CONFERENCES AND GUEST SPEAKERS AND "TALKS", IS AN AUDIENCE, A PROTECTIVE WOMB, WHERE THE INFANTILE STUDENTS CAN SWIM FOREVER IN AMNIOTIC BLISS, SEALED FROM KNOWLEDGE, FROM CRITICISM; WHERE EVEN IF YOU KNOW NOTHING WHATSOEVER, YOU ARE PERMITTED TO PRETEND YOU ARE SPEAKING SENSE INSTEAD OF BABBLING LIES. A DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH PROVIDES YOU WITH THE HERD, WHO WILL GLADLY INDULGE YOUR INTELLECTUAL DELUSIONS, FOR ONLY THE LOW, LOW COST OF YOUR INDULGING THEIRS.
ALL STUDENTS OF ENGLISH WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY'RE INTERESTED IN LITERATURE, OR, IF THEY'RE A REAL PRICK, THAT THEY'RE "PASSIONATE" ABOUT IT. BUT PROFESSING INTEREST IS NOT THE SAME AS DEMONSTRATING INTEREST. PROFESSING INTEREST IS A WAY OF ASSOCIATING YOUR PERSONAL BRAND WITH A CERTAIN ACTIVITY WITHOUT ACTUALLY HAVING TO PARTAKE IN THAT ACTIVITY. DEMONSTRATING INTEREST IS NOT AN ASSERTION BUT AN ACTION: IT MEANS DOING THE SHIT YOU'RE SO PASSIONATE ABOUT. THE MOST OBVIOUS AND MOST MEASURABLE BEHAVIOUR ASSOCIATED WITH AN INTEREST IN LITERATURE IS READING LITERATURE -- FOR THIS REASON IT IS SURPRISING TO DISCOVER HOW LITTLE ANY GIVEN ENGLISH MAJOR HAS READ.
THIS CONFUSION BETWEEN PROFESSED AND DEMONSTRATED INTEREST IS THE CHARACTERISTIC TRAIT OF ENGLISH MAJORS THE WORLD OVER. THEY WILL TELL YOU THEY'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT LANGUAGE -- WHEN THEY KNOW NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT ANY LANGUAGE. THEY WILL HAPPILY BLEAT THEIR OPINION ON DOZENS OF BOOKS THEY HAVE NEVER EVEN OPENED, AND REACT WITH BAFFLEMENT IF YOU CALL THEM ON IT. IT IS NOT THAT THEY ARE LYING DELIBERATELY. THEY DON'T SEEM TO REALIZE THAT THEY ARE LYING AT ALL: IT IS AS THOUGH THEY ARE MISSING THE MECHANISM FOR DISTINGUISHING A LIE FROM THE TRUTH.
WELL, MY FRIENDS, THAT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE. SOMETHING HAS BEEN PICKLED IN THEIR BRAINS, AND THEY HAVE FORGOTTEN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WORDS AND THINGS, BETWEEN SAYING AND DOING. THIS DISEASED SORT OF THINKING IS INEVITABLE, BECAUSE AN EDUCATION IN ENGLISH IS A LONG AND UNINTERRUPTED TRAINING IN EFFECTIVE FRAUD.
THE STANDARD OF ASSESSMENT IN ENGLISH STUDIES IS THE PERSUASIVE ESSAY. FROM HIGH SCHOOL ON, USEFUL LEARNING TECHNIQUES LIKE ROTE MEMORIZATION AND MASTERY OF SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS ARE CONFINED TO MATHEMATICS, HISTORY, AND THE SCIENCES. THE ONLY SKILL ROUTINELY TESTED IN ENGLISH IS THE ABILITY TO WRITE A FORMALLY-STRUCTURED ESSAY ATTEMPTING TO PROVE OR DISPROVE A THESIS THE STUDENT IS UTTERLY UNQUALIFIED TO JUDGE. SKILLFUL MANIPULATION OF LANGUAGE AND SKILLFUL DISGUISAL OF IGNORANCE ARE WHAT OTHER DISCIPLINES WOULD CALL SOPHISTRY -- BUT SOPHISTRY IS THE PRIZED SKILL IN ENGLISH. CHILDREN WHO CAN WRITE WELL ARE ALLOWED TO COAST WITHOUT COMPLETING THEIR WORK: WE ALL HAD FRIENDS IN HIGH SCHOOL WHO GOT PERFECT MARKS IN ENGLISH CLASS WITHOUT HAVING READ THE SET BOOKS, AND WHEN BEHAVIOUR LIKE THAT IS REWARDED, IT BECOMES HABITUAL. WE TEACH THE BRIGHT STUDENTS THAT TO LIE IS NOT ONLY A PERMISSIBLE WAY OF GETTING OUT OF WORK, BUT ACTUALLY A LAUDABLE WAY OF EXCELLING IN THE STUDY OF ENGLISH. TO SUCCEED WHERE YOU HAVE NOT MADE AN EFFORT BECOMES A BADGE OF PRIDE, A MARK OF NATURAL INTELLIGENCE RATHER THAN LABOURED KNOWLEDGE. THIS MODE OF ASSESSMENT CONTINUES RIGHT THROUGH COLLEGE.
AN ENGLISH MAJOR WHO MAKES IT THROUGH THE FIRST ROUND OF HIS OR HER EDUCATION -- THAT IS, ONE WHO SUCCESSFULLY CONVINCES A BUNCH OF FRAUDULENT ASSHOLES THAT HE/SHE KNOWS OR CARES ABOUT LITERATURE -- IS CORDIALLY INVITED TO THE SECOND ROUND, GRADUATE SCHOOL, IN WHICH OUR YOUNG SCHOLAR CAN FINALLY GIVE UP THOSE LONG, BORING NOVELS, POEMS AND PLAYS AND START ON THE LOFTIER TASK OF CONVINCING THE SAME BUNCH OF ASSHOLES THAT HE/SHE KNOWS OR CARES ABOUT PHILOSOPHY.
SINCE PHILOSOPHY IS REALLY HARD, ENGLISH DEPARTMENTS HAVE SUBSTITUTED THEIR OWN VERSION OF IT, CALLED "CRITICAL THEORY." I DON'T INTEND TO MAKE ANY CRITIQUE HERE OF THE CENTRAL THINKERS OF THIS MOVEMENT. MY ISSUE IS THAT ENGLISH GRADUATE PROGRAMS DO NOT HAVE ANY RESPECT FOR OR DESIRE TO UNDERSTAND THE THINKERS THEY PROFESS TO STUDY. WHATEVER THE MERITS OF THE FRENCH AND GERMAN POSTWAR SET, ALL OF THEM ARE WRITING IN CONVERSATION WITH LONG AND COMPLEX INTELLECTUAL TRADITIONS. FOUCAULT'S HABIT OF SPINNING AN ESSAY OFF A MINOR WORK OF KANT, DERRIDA'S DETAILED EXAMINATION OF LITTLE-KNOWN BITS AND PIECES OF ROUSSEAU, MEAN THAT THEY CANNOT BE FULLY GRASPED OR JUDGED WITHOUT A VERY SOLID BACKGROUND IN PHILOSOPHY. THEIR CONSTANT MANIPULATION OF HISTORY REQUIRES ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY IF WE WISH TO DO ANY SORT OF CRITICAL READING. THE FOUNDATION OF VIRTUALLY ALL CRITICAL THEORY IN SAUSSUREAN THEORIES OF LANGUAGE OUGHT, SURELY, TO NECESSITATE SOME FAMILIARITY WITH LINGUISTICS. ENGLISH UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS NEITHER PROVIDE NOR REQUIRE THIS KNOWLEDGE, RESULTING IN A KNOWLEDGE GAP UPON ENTRY TO A GRADUATE PROGRAM: GRADUATE PROGRAMS DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM BY IGNORING IT.
GRAD STUDENTS IN LITERATURE ARE CONSTANTLY ASSIGNED THEORISTS WHOM THEY ARE NOT REMOTELY EQUIPPED TO UNDERSTAND OR EVALUATE. NOR ARE THEY ASKED TO MAKE ANY EFFORT TOWARDS DEVELOPING THE SKILLS NECESSARY FOR SUCH UNDERSTANDING. FOR INSTANCE, LACAN, WHOSE ENTIRE OEUVRE IS A COMMENTARY ON FREUD, WHOSE FIRST AND EXPLICIT DEMAND UPON HIS READERS IS FAMILIARITY WITH ALL OF FREUD IN THE GERMAN, IS TAUGHT TO STUDENTS WHO HAVE NEVER OPENED A SINGLE VOLUME OF FREUD AND WHO ARE NO MORE CAPABLE OF GRAPPLING WITH HIS GERMAN THAN THEY ARE OF READING LACAN IN HIS NATIVE FRENCH.
THE ENGLISH GRADUATE IS TOLD: DON'T LEARN HISTORY, DON'T LEARN PHILOSOPHY, DON'T EVEN LISTEN TO THE THINKERS YOU DO READ, EXCEPT WHEN IT'S CONVENIENT AND DOESN'T REQUIRE YOU TO DO ANY WORK. IT IS ONE OF THE MOST ANTI-INTELLECTUAL ATTITUDES AVAILABLE TO HUMAN BEINGS, FIT ONLY FOR SLIMY, CAREERIST LITTLE FUCKS WHO HATE LEARNING BUT LOVE LOOKING LEARNED -- PERFECT FOR THE ENGLISH MAJOR, IN WHOSE MIND THERE IS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN RESPECTABILITY AND INTEGRITY, BETWEEN SELF AND PERFORMANCE.
THIS, OF COURSE, EXPLAINS THE BIZARRE SATISFACTION THE STUDENT OF ENGLISH TAKES IN LECTURES AND DISCUSSIONS WITH PEERS (WHICH HAVE ALWAYS SEEMED TO ME THE WORST POSSIBLE WAY OF STUDYING BOOKS AND POEMS). THE ENGLISH DEPARTMENT, WITH ITS UNNECESSARY APPARATUS OF FELLOW STUDENTS, OF DISCUSSIONS AND CONFERENCES AND GUEST SPEAKERS AND "TALKS", IS AN AUDIENCE, A PROTECTIVE WOMB, WHERE THE INFANTILE STUDENTS CAN SWIM FOREVER IN AMNIOTIC BLISS, SEALED FROM KNOWLEDGE, FROM CRITICISM; WHERE EVEN IF YOU KNOW NOTHING WHATSOEVER, YOU ARE PERMITTED TO PRETEND YOU ARE SPEAKING SENSE INSTEAD OF BABBLING LIES. A DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH PROVIDES YOU WITH THE HERD, WHO WILL GLADLY INDULGE YOUR INTELLECTUAL DELUSIONS, FOR ONLY THE LOW, LOW COST OF YOUR INDULGING THEIRS.
Friday, August 17, 2012
J. D. Salinger - The Catcher in the Rye IV
"I am about 1/3 through this dreadful book, and I have stopped reading it and have decided to write my own ending."
"I'm sure people will comment about what a great piece of work this is. To them, I say 'meh'"
"The author clearly doesn't understand that a normal person just doesn't need to read about some childish little boy that can't get a grip on his own problems or have the resolve to get help. Really, can't the writing minds in this nation do better than this?"
"If you prefer something atleast mildly entertaining that isnt page upon page of literary B*TCHING then go read a real book."
This book is not worth the paper on which it is printed ... The reader is given a negative look at humanity, not for the purpose of correcting the worst in people, but for reveling in it. For an uplifting view of man, I suggest the masterpiece novel by Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged."
"If you are fine with passively accepting published manure, that is your right. Perhaps it is because I am a writer that I take writing seriously"
"I would bet that if this were floated to publishers today it would never see the light of day."
"I'm a book critic, and this was the worst book I've ever read, and I'm a book junkie. What's with the double negatives? The plot lacked an awful lot. The whole book was a waste of my time and money. I wish someone had warned me about it before I purchased it. My old journals make better reading than this novel, and that's not saying much. If you hear me, skip this one! SNOOZE !..."
"To teh people who love this book I would say
Grow up and find out what real life is like and maybe read some real books"
"A filthy and horrible peice of literature, if you can call it literature. The only thing that makes this a classic is that it was once banned, and maybe it still should be."
"The writer should be executed for wasting our time like that. Should make a good horror story too, his dead."
"NEVER EVER READ THIS BOOK !!!! IN REMEMBERANCE OF JOHN LENNON GIVE PEACE A CHANCE RIP JOHN"
"Back in 1968, my older sister refused to read this book on moral grounds. OK, we are a bunch of vocal activists. It went to the school board. I was 12 & heard of all this as my parents tried to persuade my big sis to just let it go. She would not relent ... I knew, even at age 12, that this book was a colossal piece of crap ... Now, I am 53. Big sis is an educator. I served four terms on a local school board."
"WELL, I STARTED READING TYHIS BOOK CAUSE OF ALL THE HYPE OVER IT... AND PLUS I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS ABOUT SOME DISENCHANTED TEEN, AND SO THE BOOK SOUNDED PERFECT FOR ME. I STARTED READING IT ... TALK ABOUT A WASTE OF TREES! THE MAIN CHARACTER, HOLDEN, KEPT REPEATING HIMSELF, AND REPEATING HIMSELF...LOL. THIS SI-IiT BELONGS ON READING RAINBOW FOR GOD SAKES. THE SWEARING DIDNT BOTHER ME AT ALL...CAUSE A LOT OF TEENS SWEAR MORE THAN HOLDEN...INCLUDING ME. BUT IM REALLY ANGRY AT HOW THIS IS HOW ADULTS THINK WE TEENS ARE LIKE NOWADAYS...IT WAS PROBABLY GOOD IN THE 1940'S .... WELL WELCOME TO THE MILLENIUM LADIES AND GENTLEMEN..."
"I'm sure people will comment about what a great piece of work this is. To them, I say 'meh'"
"The author clearly doesn't understand that a normal person just doesn't need to read about some childish little boy that can't get a grip on his own problems or have the resolve to get help. Really, can't the writing minds in this nation do better than this?"
"If you prefer something atleast mildly entertaining that isnt page upon page of literary B*TCHING then go read a real book."
This book is not worth the paper on which it is printed ... The reader is given a negative look at humanity, not for the purpose of correcting the worst in people, but for reveling in it. For an uplifting view of man, I suggest the masterpiece novel by Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged."
"If you are fine with passively accepting published manure, that is your right. Perhaps it is because I am a writer that I take writing seriously"
"I would bet that if this were floated to publishers today it would never see the light of day."
"I'm a book critic, and this was the worst book I've ever read, and I'm a book junkie. What's with the double negatives? The plot lacked an awful lot. The whole book was a waste of my time and money. I wish someone had warned me about it before I purchased it. My old journals make better reading than this novel, and that's not saying much. If you hear me, skip this one! SNOOZE !..."
"To teh people who love this book I would say
Grow up and find out what real life is like and maybe read some real books"
"A filthy and horrible peice of literature, if you can call it literature. The only thing that makes this a classic is that it was once banned, and maybe it still should be."
"The writer should be executed for wasting our time like that. Should make a good horror story too, his dead."
"NEVER EVER READ THIS BOOK !!!! IN REMEMBERANCE OF JOHN LENNON GIVE PEACE A CHANCE RIP JOHN"
"Back in 1968, my older sister refused to read this book on moral grounds. OK, we are a bunch of vocal activists. It went to the school board. I was 12 & heard of all this as my parents tried to persuade my big sis to just let it go. She would not relent ... I knew, even at age 12, that this book was a colossal piece of crap ... Now, I am 53. Big sis is an educator. I served four terms on a local school board."
"WELL, I STARTED READING TYHIS BOOK CAUSE OF ALL THE HYPE OVER IT... AND PLUS I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS ABOUT SOME DISENCHANTED TEEN, AND SO THE BOOK SOUNDED PERFECT FOR ME. I STARTED READING IT ... TALK ABOUT A WASTE OF TREES! THE MAIN CHARACTER, HOLDEN, KEPT REPEATING HIMSELF, AND REPEATING HIMSELF...LOL. THIS SI-IiT BELONGS ON READING RAINBOW FOR GOD SAKES. THE SWEARING DIDNT BOTHER ME AT ALL...CAUSE A LOT OF TEENS SWEAR MORE THAN HOLDEN...INCLUDING ME. BUT IM REALLY ANGRY AT HOW THIS IS HOW ADULTS THINK WE TEENS ARE LIKE NOWADAYS...IT WAS PROBABLY GOOD IN THE 1940'S .... WELL WELCOME TO THE MILLENIUM LADIES AND GENTLEMEN..."
Thursday, August 16, 2012
SPECIAL: SECUNDA PHILIPPICA IN STUDENTES LITTERARUM
2. EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T SPEAK ENGLISH, THEY ONLY SPEAK ENGLISH
IMAGINE, IF YOU WILL, A PERSON WHO HAS BUILT HIS IDENTITY AND CAREER ON HIS LOVE AND KNOWLEDGE OF MUSIC; WHO HAS SPENT YEARS AND CONSIDERABLE MONEY STUDYING MUSIC; WHO HAS GRADUATED WITH A DEGREE IN MUSIC; WHO PERHAPS TEACHES MUSIC TO CHILDREN OR EVEN LECTURES ON IT AT A UNIVERSITY. NOW IMAGINE DISCOVERING THAT THIS PERSON HAS ONLY EVER HEARD ONE INSTRUMENT IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE: IT IS THE SAXOPHONE.
IMAGINE AN ARCHITECT WHO HAD NEVER BOTHERED TO ENTER A BUILDING MADE OF ANY MATERIAL BUT BRICK, OR AN ART CRITIC WHO HAD ONLY EVER SEEN THE COLOUR BROWN; A GOURMAND WHO EATS ONLY POTATOES. IMAGINE, O REM RIDICULAM, A STUDENT OF LITERATURE WHO ONLY READS BOOKS IN ENGLISH -- AND THEN UNDERSTAND THAT WE GRADUATE THOUSANDS OF THESE EVERY YEAR.
THERE ARE MANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS BRAZEN FARCE: THE FIRST IS THAT VIRTUALLY EVERY FIGURE THAT AN ENGLISH MAJOR WILL STUDY OVER THE COURSE OF THEIR DEGREE WAS, AT MINIMUM, BILINGUAL. FROM ROME ONWARD, THERE IS NO MAJOR POET IN WESTERN LITERATURE WHO DID NOT SPEAK A FOREIGN LANGUAGE. (IN FACT, YOU CAN GET MORE SPECIFIC: THE ONLY ONE I KNOW OF WHO DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE KNOWN ANY LATIN WAS THE GREAT WALT WHITMAN, WHO LEARNT GOOD FRENCH, SPANISH, GERMAN AND ITALIAN ON THE DOCKS.) WRITERS HAVE ALWAYS KNOWN THE INTELLECTUAL VALUE OF MULTILINGUALISM: NOT ONLY DOES IT EXPOSE YOU TO ALIEN PROSODIES, SYNTAXES, WAYS OF MEANING; IT ALSO TRAINS YOU TO SPOT THE HIDDEN TRAPS AND SNARES OF YOUR OWN LANGUAGE. IT IS THE ONE EFFECTIVE WAY TO LEARN ENGLISH GRAMMAR (SEE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION). AND YET ENGLISH MAJORS BY AND LARGE REFUSE TO BOTHER WITH FOREIGN LANGUAGES. CONSIDER THIS PEARL OF WISDOM: "I don't think there's any substance to the 'you must read an author in their original language' argument; translation is creative, and good translations are as much works of art as originals, they're just as likely to be superior as inferior."
IT WOULD TAKE A TRUE MONOLINGUAL TO BELIEVE THIS, AND A TRUE ENGLISH MAJOR TO EXPRESS IT, DESPITE HAVING ABSOLUTELY NO RELEVANT EXPERIENCE OF WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. LET'S GO BACK TO OUR MUSIC ANALOGY. IF YOU'RE WRITING A PIECE FOR PIANO YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT THE PIANO IS CAPABLE OF AS AN INSTRUMENT: ITS ABILITY TO PRODUCE MANY NOTES AT ONCE WILL LIKELY HAVE A BIG EFFECT ON YOUR COMPOSITION. AND YOU WILL DO THE SAME FOR THE DRUMS; YOU WILL THINK OF WHAT THE INSTRUMENT CAN DO AND THEN UTILIZE THAT AS BEST YOU CAN.
THE TROUBLE BEGINS WHEN YOU START TRYING TO PLAY THE PATHETIQUE SONATA ON THE DRUMS. SOME THINGS CAN BE IMITATED: YOU CAN TAP OUT THE RHYTHM, FOR INSTANCE, AND YOU COULD STILL PLAY SOME SECTIONS LOUDER THAN OTHERS. BUT THE DRUMS CAN'T DO EVERYTHING THE PIANO CAN, NOR CAN YOU SIMPLY TRANSLATE A DRUM SOLO INTO PIANO MUSIC. LANGUAGES, LIKEWISE, ARE NOT TRULY TRANSLATABLE ONE INTO ANOTHER: TAKE SOMETHING LIKE CLASSICAL CHINESE, WHICH HAS NO SYSTEM OF TENSE, PERSON, NUMBER OR GENDER -- HOW DO YOU TRANSLATE IT INTO A ROMANCE LANGUAGE, WHICH DEMANDS THE IMPOSITION OF CONCEPTS THAT WOULD NEVER HAVE OCCURRED TO MENGZI OR TU FU OR WHOMEVER YOU WILL?
GREAT THINGS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE WRITER IN ENGLISH, BUT THEY ARE NOT THE SAME GREAT THINGS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THE WRITER IN CHINESE; THERE COULD NEVER BE A CHINESE MILTON FOR THE SAME REASONS THERE COULD NEVER BE AN ENGLISH LI BAI. ANY CONTRARY BELIEF IS AN ILLUSION PRODUCED BY THE EMBARRASSING FACT OF NEVER HAVING LEARNED TO THINK EXCEPT IN ONE'S NATIVE LANGUAGE: THE LIMITS OF THAT LANGUAGE THEREFORE FOSSILIZE INTO THE LIMITS OF ONE'S MIND.
IMAGINE, IF YOU WILL, A PERSON WHO HAS BUILT HIS IDENTITY AND CAREER ON HIS LOVE AND KNOWLEDGE OF MUSIC; WHO HAS SPENT YEARS AND CONSIDERABLE MONEY STUDYING MUSIC; WHO HAS GRADUATED WITH A DEGREE IN MUSIC; WHO PERHAPS TEACHES MUSIC TO CHILDREN OR EVEN LECTURES ON IT AT A UNIVERSITY. NOW IMAGINE DISCOVERING THAT THIS PERSON HAS ONLY EVER HEARD ONE INSTRUMENT IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE: IT IS THE SAXOPHONE.
IMAGINE AN ARCHITECT WHO HAD NEVER BOTHERED TO ENTER A BUILDING MADE OF ANY MATERIAL BUT BRICK, OR AN ART CRITIC WHO HAD ONLY EVER SEEN THE COLOUR BROWN; A GOURMAND WHO EATS ONLY POTATOES. IMAGINE, O REM RIDICULAM, A STUDENT OF LITERATURE WHO ONLY READS BOOKS IN ENGLISH -- AND THEN UNDERSTAND THAT WE GRADUATE THOUSANDS OF THESE EVERY YEAR.
THERE ARE MANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS BRAZEN FARCE: THE FIRST IS THAT VIRTUALLY EVERY FIGURE THAT AN ENGLISH MAJOR WILL STUDY OVER THE COURSE OF THEIR DEGREE WAS, AT MINIMUM, BILINGUAL. FROM ROME ONWARD, THERE IS NO MAJOR POET IN WESTERN LITERATURE WHO DID NOT SPEAK A FOREIGN LANGUAGE. (IN FACT, YOU CAN GET MORE SPECIFIC: THE ONLY ONE I KNOW OF WHO DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE KNOWN ANY LATIN WAS THE GREAT WALT WHITMAN, WHO LEARNT GOOD FRENCH, SPANISH, GERMAN AND ITALIAN ON THE DOCKS.) WRITERS HAVE ALWAYS KNOWN THE INTELLECTUAL VALUE OF MULTILINGUALISM: NOT ONLY DOES IT EXPOSE YOU TO ALIEN PROSODIES, SYNTAXES, WAYS OF MEANING; IT ALSO TRAINS YOU TO SPOT THE HIDDEN TRAPS AND SNARES OF YOUR OWN LANGUAGE. IT IS THE ONE EFFECTIVE WAY TO LEARN ENGLISH GRAMMAR (SEE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION). AND YET ENGLISH MAJORS BY AND LARGE REFUSE TO BOTHER WITH FOREIGN LANGUAGES. CONSIDER THIS PEARL OF WISDOM: "I don't think there's any substance to the 'you must read an author in their original language' argument; translation is creative, and good translations are as much works of art as originals, they're just as likely to be superior as inferior."
IT WOULD TAKE A TRUE MONOLINGUAL TO BELIEVE THIS, AND A TRUE ENGLISH MAJOR TO EXPRESS IT, DESPITE HAVING ABSOLUTELY NO RELEVANT EXPERIENCE OF WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. LET'S GO BACK TO OUR MUSIC ANALOGY. IF YOU'RE WRITING A PIECE FOR PIANO YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT THE PIANO IS CAPABLE OF AS AN INSTRUMENT: ITS ABILITY TO PRODUCE MANY NOTES AT ONCE WILL LIKELY HAVE A BIG EFFECT ON YOUR COMPOSITION. AND YOU WILL DO THE SAME FOR THE DRUMS; YOU WILL THINK OF WHAT THE INSTRUMENT CAN DO AND THEN UTILIZE THAT AS BEST YOU CAN.
THE TROUBLE BEGINS WHEN YOU START TRYING TO PLAY THE PATHETIQUE SONATA ON THE DRUMS. SOME THINGS CAN BE IMITATED: YOU CAN TAP OUT THE RHYTHM, FOR INSTANCE, AND YOU COULD STILL PLAY SOME SECTIONS LOUDER THAN OTHERS. BUT THE DRUMS CAN'T DO EVERYTHING THE PIANO CAN, NOR CAN YOU SIMPLY TRANSLATE A DRUM SOLO INTO PIANO MUSIC. LANGUAGES, LIKEWISE, ARE NOT TRULY TRANSLATABLE ONE INTO ANOTHER: TAKE SOMETHING LIKE CLASSICAL CHINESE, WHICH HAS NO SYSTEM OF TENSE, PERSON, NUMBER OR GENDER -- HOW DO YOU TRANSLATE IT INTO A ROMANCE LANGUAGE, WHICH DEMANDS THE IMPOSITION OF CONCEPTS THAT WOULD NEVER HAVE OCCURRED TO MENGZI OR TU FU OR WHOMEVER YOU WILL?
GREAT THINGS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE WRITER IN ENGLISH, BUT THEY ARE NOT THE SAME GREAT THINGS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THE WRITER IN CHINESE; THERE COULD NEVER BE A CHINESE MILTON FOR THE SAME REASONS THERE COULD NEVER BE AN ENGLISH LI BAI. ANY CONTRARY BELIEF IS AN ILLUSION PRODUCED BY THE EMBARRASSING FACT OF NEVER HAVING LEARNED TO THINK EXCEPT IN ONE'S NATIVE LANGUAGE: THE LIMITS OF THAT LANGUAGE THEREFORE FOSSILIZE INTO THE LIMITS OF ONE'S MIND.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
J. D. Salinger - The Catcher in the Rye III
"I don't know why everyone tells you to read this book, IT SUCKED HUGE."
"I think that he is a spoiled child, because he called a prostitute and then he only talk with her. In a few words, this is a book without sense for me or for everyone that is a normal person."
"I am very open minded when it comes to literature (I even read through Mein Kampf without any objection) but I just hated this book!"
"It is, perhaps, a 'classic' in the sense that Britney Spears is a 'star.' ... I also suspect it is autobiographical, and so do not blame Mr. Salinger for the book's lamentable lack of any literary merit. I fear, rather, that in the writing of it he simply could not help himself."
"I hate this book. There is absolutely no point. It is so monotonous and tedious I'm about to pull my hair out. Luckily, I only have about 40 more pages to go. If I wasn't so OCD about finishing books, I would've chucked this one a looooong time ago. I seriously don't get what all the hype is about with this book. Just because it was controversial (ie. language, loose sexual references) in 1945?!?! ... Booooooo to this book!!!!"
"who cares about this guy who hates society or whatever. boring. like i need a book to tell me what's wrong with society. maybe this book is good for disillusioned teens who can't think for themselves ... RAGE AGAINST THE LITERARY MACHINE!!!"
"for something that has been touted as one of the greatest novels ever written it sure is a tough read!"
"For years I had heard it was a CLASSIC. What a joke. The only thing that kept me reading was the HOPE that it somehow would get better, sadly it NEVER did. This book can best be described as an exercise in INANE DRIVEL."
"The language Holden uses is recognizabel from TV and rap music because he swears a lot."
"He reminds me of my little bratty sister, that just deserves a big slap in the face"
"The things Holden does aren't very realistic, which 16-year-old boy would hire a prostitute in stead of visiting his mum who lives a few blocks further? I think Holden is a sick person"
"The intire book is one big lie, none of it is thrue and therefor reading this book is a useless thing to do."
"Catcher In the Rye should not be a classic novel. I strongly suggest looking for a different book that doesn't constantly refer to Prostitution and loneliness."
"ALMOST RUINED MY REPUTATION.
THIS BOOK WAS HORRIBLE. I AM IN HIGH SCHOOL AND WE HAD TO READ IT IN ONE OF MY ENGLISH CLASSES. WE WERE TOLD THAT PEOPLE WANTED TO BAN IT AND I TOTALLY AGREE. HOLDEN WAS JUST THIS LOW DOWN DEPRESSED PERSON THAT ALWAYS FELT SORRY FOR HIMSELF. PLUS THIS BOOK HAD TOO MUCH BAD LANGUAGE AND SEXUAL CONTENT IN IT. I'M NOT THE TYPE OF TEENAGER EVERYONE THINKS ABOUT. I DON'T SWEAR,DO DRUGS OR SLEEP AROUND. BUT WHEN I READ THIS BOOK, I FELT LIKE SWEARING BECAUSE THE WORDS WERE CARVED INTO MY MEMORY."
"I think that he is a spoiled child, because he called a prostitute and then he only talk with her. In a few words, this is a book without sense for me or for everyone that is a normal person."
"I am very open minded when it comes to literature (I even read through Mein Kampf without any objection) but I just hated this book!"
"It is, perhaps, a 'classic' in the sense that Britney Spears is a 'star.' ... I also suspect it is autobiographical, and so do not blame Mr. Salinger for the book's lamentable lack of any literary merit. I fear, rather, that in the writing of it he simply could not help himself."
"I hate this book. There is absolutely no point. It is so monotonous and tedious I'm about to pull my hair out. Luckily, I only have about 40 more pages to go. If I wasn't so OCD about finishing books, I would've chucked this one a looooong time ago. I seriously don't get what all the hype is about with this book. Just because it was controversial (ie. language, loose sexual references) in 1945?!?! ... Booooooo to this book!!!!"
"who cares about this guy who hates society or whatever. boring. like i need a book to tell me what's wrong with society. maybe this book is good for disillusioned teens who can't think for themselves ... RAGE AGAINST THE LITERARY MACHINE!!!"
"for something that has been touted as one of the greatest novels ever written it sure is a tough read!"
"For years I had heard it was a CLASSIC. What a joke. The only thing that kept me reading was the HOPE that it somehow would get better, sadly it NEVER did. This book can best be described as an exercise in INANE DRIVEL."
"The language Holden uses is recognizabel from TV and rap music because he swears a lot."
"He reminds me of my little bratty sister, that just deserves a big slap in the face"
"The things Holden does aren't very realistic, which 16-year-old boy would hire a prostitute in stead of visiting his mum who lives a few blocks further? I think Holden is a sick person"
"The intire book is one big lie, none of it is thrue and therefor reading this book is a useless thing to do."
"Catcher In the Rye should not be a classic novel. I strongly suggest looking for a different book that doesn't constantly refer to Prostitution and loneliness."
"ALMOST RUINED MY REPUTATION.
THIS BOOK WAS HORRIBLE. I AM IN HIGH SCHOOL AND WE HAD TO READ IT IN ONE OF MY ENGLISH CLASSES. WE WERE TOLD THAT PEOPLE WANTED TO BAN IT AND I TOTALLY AGREE. HOLDEN WAS JUST THIS LOW DOWN DEPRESSED PERSON THAT ALWAYS FELT SORRY FOR HIMSELF. PLUS THIS BOOK HAD TOO MUCH BAD LANGUAGE AND SEXUAL CONTENT IN IT. I'M NOT THE TYPE OF TEENAGER EVERYONE THINKS ABOUT. I DON'T SWEAR,DO DRUGS OR SLEEP AROUND. BUT WHEN I READ THIS BOOK, I FELT LIKE SWEARING BECAUSE THE WORDS WERE CARVED INTO MY MEMORY."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)