Print

Print


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