Nancy Gish wrote:
> One might add that "living a religion"--whatever that may mean for
> Christians, since we all know many profess and pronounce while acting
> in ways that would presumably appall Jesus--is not a requirement for
> understanding, experiencing, or fully appreciating poetry.
I don't myself know that that is true or untrue. How do you know
that to "fully appreciate" poetry does not require "living a religion"?
The circuitry of that sentence is one whose wiring I'd like to see
revealed. Not because I believe the opposite to be true; I don't. But
I'm interested to know the underpinning of such a statement, if there is
any. How, specifically, can you tell when someone is fully appreciating
> If that were true, none of us could read any poetry except that which
> affirmed our own religion or sense of the g
No, you're changing the terms. Surely "reading poetry" is not the
same as "fully appreciating" poetry. Surely there are degrees.
> It would be a pretty impoverished world.
That remains to be seen.