Railing at Greatness: Why Critics, Educators, and Readers are so Touchy These Days

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCamilo

Railing at greatness became Railing at JBI :D

---

:smilielol5::rant::leaving:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

Are you Muslim? Then how can you comment. Or better, I will assume you are female then?

---

*whispers* This assumption was actually correct, she's a "grown woman," not a "grown man."

That only illustrates how superficial and stupid such restrictions are, man or woman, he or she is still as entitled to his/her opinions of others as I am, which was my point all along.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

As for my own greatness, well, I am able to reduced 54 year old grown men to pathetic name calling and idiocy, so I guess I have some charm.

---

Once again I think I put my flag there first :patriot:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander III

Once again I think I put my flag there first :patriot:

---

I concede.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

It's difficult to discern whether it is mere trollishness, or whether they are actually serious in their endeavor. But it seems too commonplace here to just attack me as Anti-American without reading anything that I write. It is far more ridiculous when the comments that I make are not particularly anti-American, nor particularly polemic, or controversial.

As for my own greatness, well, I am able to reduced 54 year old grown men to pathetic name calling and idiocy, so I guess I have some charm.

---

Dont worry, it is you and Chomsky. Even if he got a bit gaga, still a good company :D

Oh my gosh, irony in action!

A heartfelt plea to my fellow Litnutters:

This thread, originally posted a year ago, was meant to spark a lively debate about the kind of criticism which veers away from assessing and appreciating literary works for their artistry and excellence.

Please, please do not circumvent the original intention of this thread by engaging in personal banter and political discussions.

Thank you.

Auntie
(original poster)

Was calling me a punk necessary? :lol: Probably an apt description, in any case.

I'm not going to fan the flames of this argument. I apologize for even starting it. Ironically, I agree with JBI's statements about Huck Finn. I'm tempted to do a purely narrative and aesthetic reading if I ever revisit it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf

*whispers* This assumption was actually correct, she's a "grown woman," not a "grown man."

---

:iagree:

Auntie, Nice job using your teacher skills to remind the children to stop throwing sand or they will have to leave the sandbox.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AuntShecky

Oh my gosh, irony in action!

A heartfelt plea to my fellow Litnutters:

This thread, originally posted a year ago, was meant to spark a lively debate about the kind of criticism which veers away from assessing and appreciating literary works for their artistry and excellence.

Please, please do not circumvent the original intention of this thread by engaging in personal banter and political discussions.

Thank you.

Auntie
(original poster)

---

Oh my goodness! You are right, now I feel like an old biddy.:auto: whatever that is. I never meant to dis-respect your thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AuntShecky

Oh my gosh, irony in action!

A heartfelt plea to my fellow Litnutters:

This thread, originally posted a year ago, was meant to spark a lively debate about the kind of criticism which veers away from assessing and appreciating literary works for their artistry and excellence.

Please, please do not circumvent the original intention of this thread by engaging in personal banter and political discussions.

Thank you.

Auntie
(original poster)

---

On that note...

W a r n i n g

Please discuss the topic at hand; not each other.

Further off-topic comments will be removed without further notice

and

those who insist on making such posts will receive infraction points.

I'm not sure why you think opinions across America vary so widely, but they don't. They do a little, but we are still one nation, and someone from Claifornia is not some sort of foreigner to someone from Texas.

I'll give you California... but truly Texas is some other nation... if not planet... altogether.:lol:

It is not about size, it is about diversity. The level of diversity in America cannot be compared to the level of diversity found in a single country, it is far more akin to the diversity found on a continent.

Ummm... Alex... The United States IS a single country. Certainly there is a wide level of diversity... perhaps more than exists in many single European nations... as a result of the influx of immigrants from around the world. We have large populations of Asia, Black, Hispanic, etc... and these vary in scale and ratio from place to place. There are also differences resulting from climate and employment... but these certainly even exist in countries as relatively small as France. Major cultural/economic centers like Paris differ from major industrial towns, or mining towns... and these differ highly from the small farming towns or tourist towns on the Mediterranean. There is more difference here between the small town I grew up in and the urban city of Cleveland where I live than between Cleveland and Chicago, New York, St. Louis, Washington, or Atlanta (and yes... I have been to all of them... for greater of lesser spans of time).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander III

What about christian cultures who practise vatican sponsored evil against women?

---

Like what? Vatican sponsored what? That sounds like the most ignorant statement I've seen in a long time. What are you talking about that Christians do to women? Perhaps i should go check your age to see how young you are, but I might be shocked that you're actually an adult.

Quote:

---

Slow down cowboy. I agree it is sophistry to claim that William was gay or bi, but it is even more sophistry to claim he was not. There is evidence which suggests he was gay, and it would not be suprising considering that historicaly gay men are more prone towards artistic pursuits than not - as while only 8% of the male population is gay/bi when we look at the canon of art or music or literature the figure is much higher than 8% - nonetheless the only answer which does not sound stupid to my ears is that we don't know about his sexuality, even though from historic evidence it is more likely that he was bi or gay rather than simply straight.

Out of curiosity what impelled you to state that he was not gay? Was it just good old fashioned christian bigotry or was there some actual evidence you seem to have discovered and kept hidden from the scholarly world?

---

More likely that he was gay? How do you come to that conclusion? He was married with children and in the over thousands of pages he wrote, there are about two lines from two sonnets that could possibly, possibly suggest he was gay.

Have you even read Shakespeare? I'm not even going to bother with you. You're not worth my time.