Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin, your kindly reply moves me to apologize
> for some overbearing manners earlier in this
> thread. It's one thing to try to keep a focus on
> Machen's Hieroglyphics and ideas underlying it,
> another for me to be a bit schoolmarmish about
> digressions from it.
>
> As for your final paragraph -- I have quite a bit
> of sympathy with your antipathy to woke-ism.
> Somehow you brought a poem to my mind. It's by
> the late Kingsley Amis, writing years ago. It
> uses a word I try to avoid myself. One might
> read, first the Walter de la Mare poem that Amis
> must have had in mind.
>
> [
firstknownwhenlost.blogspot.com]
> ok-thy-last-on-all-things-lovely.html
>
> [
www.johnderbyshire.com]
> l
>
> I also agree with your dismay about
> paedo-transgenderism or even the adult version.
> I'm replying to you here since you commented here,
> but I regard the topic, for myself, as closed
> hereafter on this thread.
>
> Having said that: I believe that the case for
> reading literature should be made primarily on the
> basis of its own inherent value. Too often people
> try to justify it on utilitarian grounds (e.g. it
> will help you to be a "well-rounded person," it
> will help you to develop "critical thinking,"
> etc.). But -- but -- ! Having said that, I want
> to say that I am grateful for a benefit thereof,
> extrinsic if you like, and that is the degree of
> freedom it can give you from your own time. It is
> a great good, that ability (which I possess only a
> very little) to stand outside one's own time. And
> we may be able to acquire that ability by becoming
> well-read outside our own time. It is, thus, not
> hard to think: How very, very bizarre our time is
> likely to look to historians living in the future,
> supposing there are any. Just as we may look back
> and shake our heads in wonder over some of the
> passions that inflamed the majority 400 years ago,
> so may our descendants look at us. "How, how
> could they?" And this idea that handing children
> over to be... Well, enough from me. I hope that,
> if anyone wants to discuss this topic, it could be
> done on a separate thread. So, there's my reply,
> Knygatin.
I want to reassure you, Dale, that I'm in no way discomfitted by your very obvious personal passion for literature in general and fantastic literature in particular. To me, it's nothing less than a mark of commitment to a quality analysis and discussion of topics that may--or conversely, may not--be of deep interest to me.
On the topic of Machen's
Hieroglypics as a hybrid statement of his own worldview and how it relates to written works of art I'm not deeply interested, and here's why...
My own outlook is so deeply materialist that I can conceive of no actual reason to discuss anything other than the personal enjoyment of beauty solely for its own merit so far as the observer is affected by it. In short, I really don't care if my personal reaction to de la Mare's "All Hallows"--as uniquely subtle as it strikes me--is rooted in minute and as yet unobservable physical phenomena, or the mystical and wondrous. All I care is that I enjoy the hell out of some literature (and other works of art), I don't really know *why*, but also (since as a materialist, nothing ultimately matters), and ultimately, I don't really care.
Nihilism is for the philosophically lazy, I'll admit... ;^)
In the end, I enjoy your extensive comments and examinations, Dale; I tell you honestly that they are better than all but the best of my college Lit professors from 50 years ago, as an English undergrad.
--Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~