Johnson, you misconstrued and malextended my words. My diagnosis of the problem is still prejudice - and don't take that as a statement of your innate character, as you seem to have done; your inattention to my words and lack of response led to the call, which I maintain.
My original request was simple: "What about literature?", at which you balked, saying "There is no such thing, and fuck the literature crowd." (The "Fuck off, you hoity-toity bitch." to me came later.)
My responses sought to demonstrate that there is a general category commonly, professionally, and commercially recognized as Literature or Classics. My responses purposefully attempted not to seek to define what is or is not literature (I later pointed out it was indeed futile to do so, to a degree - but only in the Austrian subjective analysis sense).
I pointed out that scores of brilliant people have spent their life energies and intellectual powers engaging in painstaking and fruitful works in literary and linguistic analysis, discovery, and theory (across many different genres of books, to refute your claim of eliticism on my part) in an attempt to better understand (which you seem to have misconstrued as synonymous with define): "What is literature?".
Despite my attempt to leave the defining and understanding of literature out of my attempt to secure a category where I could happily place my polling vote (and perhaps give others the option to do so), again you balked, malextending my words to claim I seek to define Literature according to my own tastes.
So, I pointed out a dry point: that the field of literary and linguistic analysis is still developing (an extant fact) and will continue to develop; and that specialized tools of analysis have developed and are still developing (including better linguistic tools, leading to even better understanding of those works we have with us and why they have endured; and even borrowing from other fields such as archaeology to create better understanding of works that, for some reason, have endured; and, finally, that neither you nor I will end the progress of this field of work, nor can either of us say where its finish line lies.
Your consequent reaction, that because the nature of literature is still being discovered, the term is therefore meaningless, does not follow. Such categorizations are useful for treading and creating evolutionary paths toward an ultimate understanding of Literature and Classics. The fact that the terms are employed to evoke, and do evoke a particular category of reference among the general populace and consumers, therefore proves the terms have meaning sufficient to secure one or the other term's place as a polling option, which is all I originally sought to gain.
Moreover, I pointed out another dry point: that many of these critical, analytical tools are semi-removed from any but those who diligently apply themselves to understanding them. Reading one or two works of literature does not establish a repertoire of enough depth or breadth to begin critical, analytical literary analysis. The "text" in which the development of these tools occurs is usually professional (and scattered among professional publishings), with its concomitant jargon (specialized lingo designed to collapse and organize ideas and quicken precise discussion of a topic among professionals), and couched in analyses of many disparate works, many of which (by another definition of literature, see above) require "an acquaintance with letters" and languages above and beyond that of most for full (or simply better) understanding.
Yet, again, I was misconstrued: as personally attacking your capability toward literary analysis - as saying that because a person does not like a particular literary work, they are unqualified to understand or appreciate it. I dislike plenty of the classics, but personal taste is removed from critical, analytical analysis.
My devotion to the freedom philosophy has been, so far as my purposes, unfaltering since I read about it for myself at 14-15. I love literature, and I am happy to share and discuss that which I love; and happier still to hone my knowledge thus.
All I got for my efforts, this time, it seems, was an undeserved heaping of cloddish scorn based on a series of misapprehensions and a stereotype that you loutishly, falsely attempt to lay on me; for which I maintain my call of untoward prejudice, until such time as your actions prove otherwise.
The Free Talk Live BBS
Poll
22 (1.4%)
Author
Topic: Demographics - Reading Material? (Read 48100 times)