Printable View
Yes, this is an occupational hazard. Here is an example from Alan Bennett. He’s sitting on the toilet and ‘Harpic’ is a toilet cleaner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love
“Here I sit, alone and sixty,
Bald and fat, and full of sin;
Cold the seat and loud the cistern
As I read the Harpic tin.”
If you don't analyze it, you may not fully "get it". If you don't "get it" you may subconciously analyze it. Read, learn, read the critiques of others and eventually you do enough of it automatically to enjoy the book on more than one level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Unnamable
y'all be smart, and consistently full of funny shee-ot. :brow:
Ok, starting from the beginning:
Rachel/Virgil: Comparison To Sport
Yes when I watch sports on TV, there is that part of me that automatically kicks in and starts questioning the rationale for different tactics (I honestly believe I could write a 20,000 word paper on why the 4-4-2 formation, whilst being more balnced does not provide anywhere near the fluidity of movement you can acheive by using the 4-5-1). However I dont analyze the plays to anywhere near the level that the coaches do.....and I dont feel it is necessary to do so to enjoy the game. Also I am somewhat of a "Type A" sportsfan I will watch any sport, in fact if they televised the tiddlywinks world-championships I would likely end up watching it, I do this because I get enjoyment from watching competition same with reading.
Emily/Beer Good/Steve:Picking up on sub-texts
I have a basic enough understanding of world history/politics to be able to appreciate the meanings of the books I read, and I also believe that if a literary technique is used to its full extent it should plant the image in the mind of the reader without requiring the analysis.
Petrarch's Love/Emily: Automatic to critique
I see where you are both coming from. However the example used with regards to preventing yourself analyzing the ingredient list is actually quite applicable here, though for me it is somewhat reversed. I am a Design Technologist for the Municipal Government, working specifically in Water/Wastewater. One of my current projects in analyzing different protective coatings we could use in our wet wells/dry wells, this is very much like reading an ingredient list. When I am done I am just looking for enjoyment and not particularly more "whys"
ktd222: Determining why the book is enjoyable/Amazement
Why do I need to know why I enjoy something? Is it not enough to just know that I do? Also with knowing whether a book is a "yawner" I think this can be quite obvious, if it bores me it bores me, no need again to know why it bores me it just does.
With regards to your comment on how people can be amazed by what they dont understand: This is the way it has always been since the beginning of civilization, as an example people were amazed by the steam engine now people understand the theory behind and there is far less a sense of wonderment/amazement.
PeterL: If not reading critically, Whats the Point?
For basic enjoyment to enjoy a story, as an example I love the stories of king Arthur and feel it is perfectly possible to read them just as a story. In fact I feel some of my enjoyment would be taken away if I was constantly looking through it thinking about whether each technique used was effective.
Claes/Petrarch's Love/EAP: Different ways of reading
Not much to say here I agree with all three of you People read things for different reasons, all equally valid.
Unnamable: Harpic Poem
:lol: :lol:
wow, who are you KILTED, you sound like a man who has roamed the halls of academics for a while.
And for a Scot, ye are not skint with yer words, they are great. i am going to print this out, very insightful. thank you.
Reading critically is something that comes naturally as skill level in reading increases. Lit. has endless dimensions - I do believe that by not experiencing them that you are missing out on something.
Chances are though, that critical reading comes natural to those experienced. At least that is what I have been led to believe. It does allow me to enjoy books a great deal more as well.
Unless I'm veryyyyyyyy sleep deprived (college) than I commit the greatest error - just reading the words - not everything that they create.
Ok Geoff let's suppose for a second that I have read enough/been taught enough to be able to correctly analyze the techniques used by an author, but I choose however not to do so. There are a number of works of classic literature which work perfectly well as just** an excellent story I mentioned King Arthur earlier but there are many others. The authors wrote these stories to be enjoyed and isn't that all that matters?
**I dislike using the word "just" here as it gives the impression that being a story is not good enough, but I cant think of another way to put it.
Is it necessary to read critically? No, but it's critically necessary to read! :nod:
C'mon now, how are you going to know that? There has to be a certain level of critiquing that happens.Quote:
Why do I need to know why I enjoy something? Is it not enough to just know that I do?
Are you speaking for all of civilization? I'm certainly not one for being amazed at things I don't understand. 'Ohhhhhhhhh...fire warm. MMM..me like'Quote:
This is the way it has always been since the beginning of civilization, as an example people were amazed by the steam engine now people understand the theory behind and there is far less a sense of wonderment/amazement
He is talking about art.
Artist are known by their mysteriousness. That is ridiculous! People get amazed by artist that connect with them, connect with them too well.Quote:
That is why an artist is known by his works because many are amazed by a mystery they do not understand. If you really want to understand the creator read their journals and savor their thoughts, in them you’ll find the ingredients that made up the meal
ktd222— I think everyone has their own reasons and ways of appreciating art. I don't believe such a thing is easily qualified. Perhaps your way of interpreting art is different from some other people's. I'm curious about your vehemence on this subject, but I fear questioning it further would take us too far off-topic.
ktd
I actually do know a reasonable amount regarding critical analysis of art (the brothers girlfriend has a Masters in Art History and is doing an internship at the Getty Foundation), but I agree with Emily that would take us off-topic.
I think your comments about needing to understand the reason why I enjoy something relate to the same points raised by PeterL which I answered earlier but will answer again for you: The enjoyment of just an interesting story is enough for me, similar to sitting round a campfire telling stories is enjoyable, without critiquing the entire thing to death. If you are unable to enjoy things for just being what they are then I actually feel kinda sorry for you.
Just one more analogy: Do you find rainbows/sunsets beautiful? Are rainbows more beautiful when you look at it as merely the spectrum of visible light refracting through the drops of moisture in the air and splitting into the individual wavelenghts? Sorry it aint for me, if I think about the physics behind it it loses something.
Your not even getting to the reasons WHY you enjoy them! What is it about camp stories that you enjoy? Everybody has a reason--even you.Quote:
The enjoyment of just an interesting story is enough for me, similar to sitting round a campfire telling stories is enjoyable, without critiquing the entire thing to death. If you are unable to enjoy things for just being what they are then I actually feel kinda sorry for you.
It doesn't have to be to that degree. Everybody critiques everything at one degree or another.Quote:
Just one more analogy: Do you find rainbows/sunsets beautiful? Are rainbows more beautiful when you look at it as merely the spectrum of visible light refracting through the drops of moisture in the air and splitting into the individual wavelenghts? Sorry it aint for me, if I think about the physics behind it it loses something.
Then why say it. Ya, my great great great great great great grandfather use to walk his dog by Shakespeare's house and would eavesdrop on Shakespeare. So what?Quote:
I actually do know a reasonable amount regarding critical analysis of art (the brothers girlfriend has a Masters in Art History and is doing an internship at the Getty Foundation), but I agree with Emily that would take us off-topic.
See this is the point you're missing I dont care why I enjoy them I just do. Analyzing why I like things takes the fun away. Or is a joke more funny if you spend 10 minutes questioning why it was funny?
I say it because I was annoyed by what I infered from your comments. Whether you intended to imply it or not it came across as extremely condescending.Quote:
Then why say it. Ya, my great great great great great great grandfather use to walk his dog by Shakespeare's house and would eavesdrop on Shakespeare. So what?
ktd, I'm curious. Why does analyzing your own reason behind enjoyment matter so much to you? I mean, I do understand you on that point—I get a geeky thrill from dissecting my own neural processes, as I do from dissecting an author's writing process,—but that's just a personal enjoyment of mine. I don't do it on principle, and I don't require that others do the same. You seem to have a deeper, more ideological urgency in insisting that such an approach is the only way to experience life. What is it?
So you don't know why the joke is funny?Quote:
See this is the point you're missing I dont care why I enjoy them I just do. Analyzing why I like things takes the fun away. Or is a joke more funny if you spend 10 minutes questioning why it was funny?