Skip to main content

View Diary: Lamont in WSJ: The Democrats mean business (292 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You answered my question: Wolfson. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Monique Radevu

    But "An ... user's guide"?  You're appropriating the title?  Updated=reimagined??

    •  The Complete Dummies Guide to Ventiloquism (0+ / 0-)

      is still my fave!

      by 'Updated' I meant ... where do things go from here? how do we use the great, magnificent tradition of the Enlightenment, Paine, Mill, Berlin, Rev King, Rawls, Bishop Tutu, Rorty, & corresponding literary figures (Dickens, Rushdie...), given the push/back against liberal traditions, the resurgence of 'vengeance' theosystems in the supposedly modern world, the rise/return of US fascism in the Bush era?

      there's my life's work, what talent I have has to go to that, it's the one important thing where I hope I can make a difference; supporting reason against fear.

      Lester Pearson forged a diplomatic end to the Suez Crisis of '56, partly by inserting peacekeeping troops - & justly received the Nobel Peace Prize. The citation was simple: "For saving the world."

      All I want is for MY Nobel Literature Prize to read the same!!! lol

      [& that, MissSpanishInquisition, is how a master does ...


      your pretentiousness is as a grain of sand compared to my mighty Himalaya!]

      Mean people truly, really suck suck suck. Bye for now, & sorry about what happened to all the fish! (they were Pisces, & working to scale...)

      by Monique Radevu on Wed Aug 16, 2006 at 01:30:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  My dear (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Monique Radevu

        (imagine this said in whatever is the female version of the avuncular voice), having studied and then taught in Oxford for 12 years (B.Phil, D.Phil and several research fellowships, etc), I can say:  nothing in Oxford that is admired is derivative.  You don't want to define your question in terms of the past.  You'll want to start with some hypotheses of where we need to go.  

        So you want to announce the limits of the past in answering the new questions that you are now articulating.

        Seriously.  The approach that's admired is:  While we of course are cognizant of the past achievements in the tradition - and of course none of us can be completely independent of that tradition, however we might want to be - the tradition is now failing us, because it cannot articulate, still less answer, the following question:....

        well, you'll see.  The best in Oxford is iconclastic, and originality is highly admired.  The American version of scholarly achievement is basically Germanic, and much in Oxford is defined against the idea of the boring Germanic literature searches, etc.

        Well, I could go on.  Let us know what you think.

        •  Hear ya, no surprise in what you say. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          But like Stravinsky found fresh neo-classic fields in pastiches of pre-romantics (Bach, Pergolesi, Gesualdo) as a lever, to make a sharp antithesis to the slodge of the lumbering overhang of 19th Cent. romanticism, so a fresh assessment of a modern (ie MINE hee hee) incarnation of liberalism, which will soothe like an antidote meeting its poison, a specific for the disease, the Totalitarian Temptation of the Unitary Presidency, theo-vengeance & other perversions of neo-con, the life-hating echo of Falange & Fasce.

          or I'll just write an incredibly good novel ...

          Mean people truly, really suck suck suck. Bye for now, & sorry about what happened to all the fish! (they were Pisces, & working to scale...)

          by Monique Radevu on Wed Aug 16, 2006 at 09:59:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Of course, with a few (0+ / 0-)

            startling exceptions, it's all pastiche, one suspects.  The anxiety of influence leads most to deny this and to smooth over the seams.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site