Good literary criticism from @lionel_trolling! I proclaim myself the same. I, too, read Trilling on "Mansfield Park" but never the novel. I liked "The Liberal Imagination" so much it confused me into an untenable view of liberalism for years. 1/
It all started in college, loving Orwell's essays - not just the one on "Politics and the English Language" everyone reads. Orwell's novels? - meh. Later, one book that had an outsized influence on my own writing, maybe thinking style, is William Empson's "Argufying". 2/
Check it at the Internet Archive (but you have to check it out.) I'll snippet the opening from the title essay. This caused me to read Donne seriously but also to think about the liminal place of argument in various genres. 3/ archive.org/details/argufy…
For several years I had a thing about critiquing 'Theory', some of you old-hands may remember. Well, I was mostly right! (But you can't keep beating the drum of how mostly right you are forever. Looks like mostly gloating.) But one way I would put it is: 4/
'Theory' was largely Empsonian argufying. Which is not a bad thing. But institutionally hypertrophic argufying needs 'what's really going on here?' deflation. I think Empson is consistently sharp about mixing arguing and theory and 'what's really going on here' realtalk. 5/
He has a nice way of jumping in and out of his topics, brisk yet diplomatic. He taught me tricks for shifting registers in ways I regard as efficient & admirable. I have hereby rendered my own best stuff academically unpublishable due to: you are supposed to write worse, alas. 6/
Here are a few openings. He has good stuff to say about I.A. Richards, even though: who cares about I.A. Richards? Well, it's still interesting. He's always judicious on 'difficult writing' and its uses and abuses. 7/
I'll finish with bits from Empson's essay on "Orwell at the B.B.C." They worked together in the 'Liar's Club'. Fun fact: before the Battle for Britain was won in the air, maybe the army was chatting up George on the side about how to keep up the fight, Spanish style. 8/
George was kind of an asshole. This is some fuckery. One thing to appreciate about Orwell is the degree to which he was a convicted, radical egalitarian who walked the walk BUT that meant certain monsters of the British id got out when he talked the talk. 9/
Turns out scratching is older than Wikipedia thinks. (I guess this might be 'backcueing'.) Also, this note about Hitler getting royalties is great. 10/ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scratchin…
And these thoughts on "Animal Farm". English farming cartoon explainers. The next time some winger quotes Orwell at you, like butter wouldn't melt in their mouth, kindly tell them Orwell found it a torture to write it, because he knew their kind would put it to evil use. 11/
Other literary criticism I appreciate that no one reads anymore? Conrad Aiken is good. All this reminds me I should reread some old books, not just tweet all day. Here's the Ganz thing again. He's good. johnganz.substack.com/p/on-reading-c… 12/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
bostonreview.net/race-politics/… This is good. Scholar-activism - CRT folks and others - is going to mean sometimes scholarship takes a backseat to activism. That's not intolerable - not even bad - but it does mean stuff should get pushed pack on, in a scholarly sense. 1/
The 'ideal scholar' is some neutral, suspended mind, just weighing evidence - some Watcher figure on the moon. Sure, but that's not life. Scholarship involves advocacy and advocacy can be one-eyed and insistent, leading it to shade the truth, or sweep stuff under the rug. 2/
That's why you have other scholars. Scholar-activism is part of academic ecology. But it can go bad and get grifty, even. So, for its own good, and everyone else's it should get considerate pushback when it goes awry. All this is very obvious, in principle. 3/
I've been spending Sundays posting old "Jugend" illustrations, often with a 'fantasy' quality, after Böcklin. Tomorrow, tomorrow. Today, a thing I've posted before, James Tissot, "The Challenge". I didn't know much about it. But today I googled one tidbit. 1/
Tissot was a society painter who was rubbished by Ruskin as a slickster fashionista. This hurt and "The Challenge" was his attempt to 'go serious'. This is funny to us because it just looks like, you know, fantasy art. Kinda light fetish-y. (No kink-shaming tho!) 2/
But there was this period, in Britain as well as on the continent - in Germany (although Böcklin was Swiss) - when fantasy seemed 'modernist'. I would like to know more about the moment 'when fantasy was modern', then rejected as unsuitable, in visual art. 3/
Maybe I'll pile on this thread later, with the rest. For starters, I think we can agree Biden don't jive. The word is 'jibe'. But it's one of those words people get wrong. 1/
So I got curious. Whence 'jibe'? The odd thing is that this usage is opposite to other senses, seemingly. 'To jibe' is to sneer; or steer a boat in a way I wouldn't describe as 'harmonizing' with the wind. 2/ google.com/search?client=…
The OED says it's a mystery but the first instance, from 1813 - "it curricle-izes or gibes in but too well with the passing anecdotes of the day" - seems to suggest a clear solution and it isn't the phonetic connection to 'chime'. 3/
New OBZ! Some delicate color here - lest one think Nietzche feels only contempt for these derpy denizens of the town. Do not these spots of color indicate an earnest wish on Z's, hence N's, part that the organ grinder not merely have his organs ground? 1/ onbeyondzarathustra.com/copy-of-gdfd-p…
Speaking of which! There is no 'team' in 'intestinal', but there is an 'I' and a 'test'. We are really getting to "Ye have made your way from worm to man, and much within you is still worm ..." 2/
Look at the little guy's face? Is he not - we? As Alexander Pope writes:
"So morning insects that in muck begun,
Shine, buzz, and fly-blow in the setting sun."
If this doesn't get 'likes' I'm complaining to the manager.
Incredible. Still only a few likes for a meme that has something for everyone: Neoliberals with a sense of detachment; anti-neoliberals; people who aren’t sure what ‘neoliberalism’ means.
Kerr BOTH thinks we should be talking about it as a thing that could be good AND that we are only permitted to use a word for it that implies it couldn't be good, 'court-packing'? C'mon, pick a lane. 1/
The D's need a philosophy of the judicial branch to counter 'originalist' argle-bargle from the right. 'Originalism' is a rhetoric not a philosophy (well, it's a bad philosophy, but so are most rhetorics.) But it's been hugely successful. 2/
D's need to counter that, undesirable as this is, the SC is now thoroughly politicized. Maybe it's all the fault of that darned Earl Warren, but, whatever, in recent decades the right has seen to it that its 6 R-appointed Justices are expected to be reliable partisans. 3/