Print

Print


Peter

Sounds like "Reader Response"  to my admittedly uneducated ears.  I always
did like the notion that my ignorant guesses were superior to the purpose of
literary genius.

???????The question is:  what is inconsistent about a steak in a
slum???????????

????????What is inconsistent about the mobile phone hanging from the pocket
of the student who needs grants to go to college??????????

!!!!!The point is that free people make free choices throughout their free
lives.  That the free poor are free to indulge themselves with symbolic
luxury and freely enjoy it!!!!!!

!!!!!!That it is the unfree poor, enslaved by ideology and  bureaucracy,
that are truly poor!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!That because a person's behavior doesn't meet the theoretical
requirements of a category is no reason to reject that behavior.  It may
indicate that rejection of the theory is needed.  Growth may be needed on
the part of your student!!!!!!

!!!!!!This of course would required a basic belief in the dignity of all
people regardless of their circumstance!!!!!!!

Instead of denying the poor the desire and capability to make their world
more beautiful why not enjoy that beauty with them.

An instructor might have asked his student what she made of the following
lines of prose by an obsolete author writing with very expired shelf life
imagery.

"In half a minute Mrs. Cratchit entered; flushed but smiling proudly; with
the pudding; like a speckled cannon-ball, so hard and firm; blazing in half
a quantern of ignited brandy, and bedight with Christmas holly stuck into
the top.
     Oh what a wonderful pudding!  Bob Cractchit said, and calmly too, that
he regarded it as the greatest success achieved by Mrs. Cratchit since their
marriage.  Mrs. Cratchit said that now the weight was off her mind, she
would confess she had had her doubts about the quantity of flour."
(pg 94 "A Christmas Carol" Charles Dickens)

You and your student would deny Mrs. Cratchit her pride in the Christmas
pudding that they had scrimped for ( who would have thought that the poor
could have afforded to burn brandy).  Or, you would deny that Charles
Dickens really meant what he wrote!!!!!!!!

The inconsistency of burning brandy in a poor house, my goodness, there must
be some explanation for this aberrant and abhorrent behavior.  Some way that
an instructor can help the student realize the student's potential. The
Cratchits should have all gotten drunk on the brandy, gone out and burned
down the poulterer's shop along with the turkey that Scrooge was going to
buy them.  That would have been proper slum behavior.  But they didn't, oh
my, oh my, the inconsistency.  It must have been bad brandy that was thrown
out in the garbage behind the gentlemen's club that Tiny Tim stumble over
while huddling from the cold wind.  Or, maybe Dickens just didn't appreciate
the circumstances of his characters.  Or, Or!!!!

Rick Seddon
McIntosh, NM