What are you reading right now?
#41
(06-17-2009, 04:48 AM)Melita Wrote: I used to love reading Modernist stuff, but after getting it critiqued to you the holes (chasms...) become too glaring to ignore. Still, Prufrock is sweetness.

If all Eliot is to you is just a  "modernist", then it would probably be a waste of time for you to read him.  His despair was directly related to what he perceived to be the waning of Christianity as the primary social structure in the West. 
Reply
#42
(06-17-2009, 09:02 AM)Magnificat Wrote:
(06-17-2009, 04:48 AM)Melita Wrote: I used to love reading Modernist stuff, but after getting it critiqued to you the holes (chasms...) become too glaring to ignore. Still, Prufrock is sweetness.

If all Eliot is to you is just a  "Modernist", then it would probably be a waste of time for you to read him.   His despair was directly related to what he perceived to be the waning of Christianity as the primary social structure in the West. 

I have read/studied him. As a poet, his work is capable of delighting, as a critic he is painfully outmoded. His despair is often outrageously camp.... but of course, that attracts certain readers.
Reply
#43
(06-17-2009, 09:07 AM)Melita Wrote:
(06-17-2009, 09:02 AM)Magnificat Wrote:
(06-17-2009, 04:48 AM)Melita Wrote: I used to love reading Modernist stuff, but after getting it critiqued to you the holes (chasms...) become too glaring to ignore. Still, Prufrock is sweetness.

If all Eliot is to you is just a  "Modernist", then it would probably be a waste of time for you to read him.   His despair was directly related to what he perceived to be the waning of Christianity as the primary social structure in the West. 

I have read/studied him. As a poet, his work is capable of delighting, as a critic he is painfully outmoded. His despair is often outrageously camp.... but of course, that attracts certain readers.

Like perhaps those who wouldn't dismiss the despair of another soul, regardless of how it's expressed?
Reply
#44
...the relationship between reader and text is not the same as a relationship between individuals.
Reply
#45
(06-17-2009, 10:09 AM)Melita Wrote: ...the relationship between reader and text is not the same as a relationship between individuals.

Funny how you write that in text to an individual and form a "relationship" of a kind.

Reply
#46
I'm reading Beowulf. Owl
Reply
#47
(06-17-2009, 10:26 AM)Rosarium Wrote:
(06-17-2009, 10:09 AM)Melita Wrote: ...the relationship between reader and text is not the same as a relationship between individuals.
Funny how you write that in text to an individual and form a "relationship" of a kind.

I meant "text" here as "textuality". Although the idea can extend to writing itself too.
Reply
#48
(06-16-2009, 06:15 PM)Domini Canis Wrote:
(06-16-2009, 01:12 PM)Pilgrim Wrote:
(06-10-2009, 10:41 PM)Domini Canis Wrote: Reading Chesterton's biography of St. Thomas Aquinas.
Have you read his biography on Francis?  Ignatius puts out a great edition with both works in one book.

Haha. That's the exact book I'm reading! My wife gave it to me last Christmas.
It's great to have both of them together, though I'm not sure why Ignatius put the Aquinas bio first when Chesterton wrote on Francis ten years earlier...

So, what do you think so far?

Reply
#49
(06-17-2009, 10:32 AM)Tobias Wrote: I'm reading Beowulf. Owl

A translation or original?

Reply
#50
(06-17-2009, 10:45 AM)Rosarium Wrote: [quote='Tobias' pid='389984' dateline='1245249129']
I'm reading Beowulf. Owl

A translation or original?


[/quote

A translation.  I wouldn't know what to do with an original. Dunce

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)