Subject
Re: VN and debunking the postmodern myth (fwd)
From
Date
Body
From: Robert Rabiee <costanza2000@yahoo.com>
Dear Andrew,
A quick note. When I think of theory that is both
interesting and infintely readable, I immediately
think of Roland Barthes's "A Lover's Discource
(Fragments)," or Derrida's somewhat psychotic "The
Post Card."
As to the broader question of theory, I necessarily
see no problem with it, as long as it isn't taken TOO
seriously. I try and see it as a game, a chess
problem, that needs solving. Does it necessarily help
to unlock secrets of the texts? Often times yes, often
times no.
But none of this changes the fact that writing (and
reading) theory, no matter how beautiful or
fascinating, can never really replace the impact of
capital-L Literature. The root of all my academic
interests is my love of reading, plain and simple.
Theory is just an interesting subgenre.
All the best,
Robert Y. Rabiee
Dear Andrew,
A quick note. When I think of theory that is both
interesting and infintely readable, I immediately
think of Roland Barthes's "A Lover's Discource
(Fragments)," or Derrida's somewhat psychotic "The
Post Card."
As to the broader question of theory, I necessarily
see no problem with it, as long as it isn't taken TOO
seriously. I try and see it as a game, a chess
problem, that needs solving. Does it necessarily help
to unlock secrets of the texts? Often times yes, often
times no.
But none of this changes the fact that writing (and
reading) theory, no matter how beautiful or
fascinating, can never really replace the impact of
capital-L Literature. The root of all my academic
interests is my love of reading, plain and simple.
Theory is just an interesting subgenre.
All the best,
Robert Y. Rabiee