--- In rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan Cain" <IndieCrime@...> wrote:
>
> Speaking of academics, literature vs. popular fiction and Umberto Eco,
> I recently attended a lecture Eco gave at Emory University about his
> writing process (It was part of a series, but I could only pencil one
> in). In it, he talked about his books. As you know, his first novel
> The Name of the Rose was a murder mystery set in a medieval monastery
> and his second one, Foucalt's Pendulum was a thriller influenced by
> American detective fiction. During the course of the lecture, Eco made
> the distinction between "high" and "low" culture, which seemed odd to
> me, given that he has obviously been influenced very much by "low"
> culture. It was a passing comment, which he didn't really expand on,
> but it made me grind my teeth a little. Perhaps he went more into what
> he considers the distinction between the two to be in one of the other
> lectures.
It's a common notion. Students hear that notion in lectures and they
get imprinted. An imprint that excludes and suggests a rating system
for quality based on genre cannot be a good thing. What became of the
principle of not spoiling it for others? You can discuss Dante and
Shakespeare without making a value judgment relative to other forms of
literature. Literature = stories. Almost everybody is interested in
stories, but not the _same_ ones! That is the problem with the canon.
Best,
mrt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 19 Nov 2008 EST