Thanks a lot mrt...
Iım saving this and retain the argumentation for my next discussion with
friends here, there and everywhere...
On 2/28/09 1:30 AM, "jacquesdebierue" <email@example.com> wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:rara-avis-l%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> Steve Novak <Cinefrog@...> wrote:
>> > Really: Iım VERY curious to understand/investigate...why the
> Goodisesı of
>> > the US writing world never ³made² it...are there socio-political
>> > reasons...but more importantly: are there economical
> reasons...???...or just
>> > simple fate?...
>> > I have been told a few times by intellectual/literary authoritiesı from
>> > varied backgrounds that it can all be reduced to the influence of the
>> > churches/religious entities/establishment....and their power in all the
>> > publishing worlds...and their lackeys...i.e. the critics...????
> I don't know of a convincing explanation. Yes, there have been
> powerful forces wanting to censor, but consider how many great
> examples of film noir (including by Hammett, Caldwell, Goodis, etc.)
> were made in the golden era. Consider the kinds of films that Martin
> Scorsese and yes, Jules Dassin made, almost like documentaries and not
> even showing the good side of society. So, there is in principle no
> problem with such films, they were and are made and they are seen by
> millions of people. Likewise, television series.
> The canonization of books probably follows quite a different path. I
> think there is evidence that "genre" literature is segregated. The NYT
> still does it, though Leonard, for example, might be reviewed in the
> "regular" section of the NYRB. Most others go to Marilyn Stasio, who
> gives a brief review of three or four books, within the cage of
> mysteries. How do schools and universities pick their canon? They seem
> to follow the segregation model. For example, they don't put David
> Goodis and James Sallis with Franz Kafka, as they probably should.
> After all, Cassidy's Girl is going to feel pretty familiar to the
> students, and it is as good an example of total insignificance and
> defeat of the individual as Kafka's.
> There is still the idea of the "great books", that somehow it matters
> whether one reads the Iliad or not. It doesn't matter. If you read Jim
> Thompson and not Thackeray, it's fine. If you read Italo Calvino and
> not Shakespeare, that's fine, too. If you read Cormac McCarthy for
> dystopias instead of Brave New World, that's fine, people will get a
> lot out of it. Harold Bloom has had a bad influence on this great book
> business. This attitude considers learning and course-taking as some
> sort of badge of honor. It is nothing of the sort. Reading some good
> books, maybe not that many, and thinking about them a lot, discussing
> them, that's what it's about. Especially reading a little and thinking
> a lot. No badge (frankly, thinking of education as a badge is ridiculous).
> To be continued, my fingers are tired... Maybe yawl will get lucky and
> I'll forget about the whole thing.
734 429 4997 - off
313 300 0770 - cell
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 28 Feb 2009 EST