 |
 |
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:56:46 -0400, Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >I think we should consider a couple of problems raised by the >student paper. It is clearly written by a smart undergraduate who writes >very well. But it illustrates what I think is an increasingly serious >issue, not only in academia but in the country: evaluating a text (or >anything) on how it makes one feel. I deleted the text, but now I think I >should have reread it. Nonetheless, the writer has apparently been >asked--or has chosen--to respond to TWL on the basis of its effect on her >personal experience and feelings. And I do not mean reader-response, which >requires careful analysis. Rather, it simply "shares" her feelings of >exclusion or inclusion. > >That can be an effective way to start an examination of the text but only a >start; as a conclusion, it does not really honor the text itself or the >importance of studying the voices in it. Yeah, I think you should reread the essay. https://www.stanforddaily.com/2017/10/19/finding-the-third-voice-in-t-s-eliots-the-waste-land/ Regards, Rick Parker