I agree with every word from the the - well said.

Frankly I don't agree with the author's premise. I am a voracious reader, and fairly well educated. I think a vital part of reading, especially for enjoyment, is to lay back and let a book wash over you. And when it's done, you ask yourself, "How do I feel?". That's how literature moves you. After you figure out how the book made you feel, you start looking at why, and you start analyzing what the story meant, and you go back to reread the passages that moved you and see if what you felt is the meaning the author was trying to convey.

A good book moves you. That means it touches you emotionally and makes you feel something. That's usually what authors are shooting for.

Well said the. If my kids turn out to be happy, respectful, well adjusted, successful adults, I did my job well.

I stand by my initial comment - the author is bitter, obviously had a crappy childhood, and likely needs therapy.

What's sad is that he was *teaching* lit classes. He doesn't really seem to understand art...

Nostatic,

I think the point the gentleman was trying to make is (at that level) the process is not looking inward to determine how the art (writing in this case) made them feel or how they perceived it, but to study how the artist did what they did.

If you are to be a mechanic it really isn't germaine whether or not you feel tingles up your spine when you hear a racing engine at 10,000RPM. What is important is: do you know how to use a torque wrench? Can you inspect for faults and assemble an engine?

Our education system, for some muddle-headed reasoning, wastes much effort telling kids anything they do is fine as long as they don't cause trouble. The kids know BS when they smell it. They need to be challenged, they need to know that success was theirs, not handed to them.

We as a society need people who aren't just 'in touch with their feelings' but also know how things work and how to get them done.

You might say that most who are enrolled in literature courses aren't going to be authors. You are probably right. But they might go on to be editors, reviewers, journalists, etc. and it would be good if they actually understood the process. Heck, it's good for all of us to understand a bit of the process if only to appreciate why we can't do it.

Les

I love you... you love me...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1212705068.jpg

There is a place for analysis in literature. But if it doesn't start from the art/emotion then there is no point. It sounded to me like he was dismissing this side of the equation entirely. I'll go back to a word I used previously - balance.

I think his point about earning merit is well taken.

But author sure sounds like a lonely soul. I don't see anyting wrong with each parent loving and encouraging their children, regardless of the childs ability.

Yes, I would like to see people with better critical thinking skills in the world. But most people don't want to know the truth. Most people are happy to look at the flickering shadows on Platos cave wall. So why embitter ones self and fixate on the inane masses romanticism?

all good stuff above


I know a guy that grew up winning and losing. He even learned to count playing blackjack. His pop's income was 50% from card games so he was offered being the prodigal son if he was good enough.

One thing he says is that his pop raised him "hungry". He does happen to be relentless..


go figure