my paper

Significant Anxiety

There exists something in the mental engagement with literature. It’s not coherent or overtly recognizable. It’s rather an instinctual draw to yearn for rhetoric. Whether engaging in the current cultural discourse or reading about the emotions of the past there is always an inherent skill with it. Reading, writing, and dramatic performances are the keen skills in use in the life of an English major. Literature engagement promotes not just the skill to be able to perform successful daily functions but also the skill to interpret those daily functions to all.
It’s true that traditionally rhetoric accounts for the “here” and “now” but in order to comprehend cultural movements of the past people need to read more. Reading, whatever genre it may be will eventually yield skills that help one convey what they actually feel. What would historical pursuits be if there wasn’t the literature to exude the feelings of the time? What would psychological interpretation actually mean if there were no developed metaphors or literary allusions? What would happen if portraits of place, character, winter or human interactions were not recycled in contemporary culture? There would be no culture.
Thought processes can be reduced to cognitive functions and learned imitations. Such thought processes are required in mathematical pursuits but what happens after that? After all the equations, formulas and solutions were does the mind go? I’m certain it doesn’t do anything except idle in preparation for something else. Poetry on the other hand starts will the idle mind and invokes infinite tangents to be discovered. “Poetry awakens and enlarges the mind itself by rendering it the receptable of a thousand unapprehended combinations of thought” (Shelley). Surely no mathematical equation can do this. Of course, there are symbols substituted in math but they would not have quality definitions without a history of prose accompanying them. Symbols exist only for further illustrating a definition. The hinges of a door wouldn’t mean anything unless the symbol of a door is cognitively invoked. Symbols in poetry are “primarily a verbal structure or set of representative words” (Frye). Dare I say the same representative symbols exist in math? Yes, only math ends with solutions and does promote anything beyond that. However literature engagement is everything beyond a solution.
Daily functions are more often reduced to habits of the economical realm reality. They are habits necessary for autonomous being. With the futile practice of cleaning, laboring or driving nothing can subside the monotony of daily functions like writing about them. I cannot name or think of any other discipline that promotes reflection in the form of writing. Writing “nonsense by the ream” becomes the interpretation of what happened and turn it into what is felt about the “happening.”
No social interaction can be repeated in the same way. The mental engagement in producing something on paper forces the mind to create out of memory and rhetorical emotion. “It is admitted that the exercise of the imagination is most delightful, but it is alleged that that of reason is more useful” was one of Shelley’s many “reasons” for promoting the continuation of delightful imagination in creating poetry (Shelley). Reason is a powerful abstract method for suggesting how to understand something. In contrast to having the anxiety in comprehending “reasons” why does poetry invoke such similar anxiety? The deference is in the type of anxiety in “abstract reason” and “literary allusion.” Abstract reasons hosts anxiety that is purposeful. It exudes anxiety the purpose of eventually understanding an idea. Literary allusion promotes anxiety that is detached. It promotes anxiety detached from a central understanding or comprehension. The evocative feelings of reading or creating poetry are the anxious addictive mentalities the mind sifts through in order to comprehend what’s possible in poetry. One poem can mean one thing for one person yet mean another thing for the same person an hour later.
The feeling of anxiety are the emotions of a moment. Sure people can label their work day full of anxious duties and tasks but none actually know the true feeling unless they chose to engage with literature. Reading about the life of a character in a novel and not knowing what will happen in unsure circumstances is true anxiety. It’s the most organic kind of emotion available for human life because it comes from the imagination. The feeling of connecting with a literary character is foremost unique because the mind constructs a relationship that exists simultaneously in reality and imagination. “We want the creative faculty to imagine that which we know; we want the generous impulse to act that which we imagine; we want the poetry of life,” is an instinctual draw to the rhetorical moments of the past (Shelley). It’s also the unique feeling of life while reading about life in poetry.
What other classrooms host a place for imagination such as literature classes do? How can a power point presentation instill more social connections than a comical sketch performance? I’m certain power point presentations can for a few moments but certainly they wouldn’t last in the imagination of the audience as much as a stage performance would for a long time after.
In the classroom inspiration is paramount. No imagination will get sparked unless passion for literature is exemplified. “For who will be taught if he be not moved with desire to be taught” (Sidney). In other collegiate disciplines group work encompasses a majority of learning. Where is the lesson in that? How can one individual feel the pressure to create something with their own knowledge and reflection? English majors have such experience in group work but mostly operate on their own. They have nothing but the text to engage with. Slowly but inevitably the opportunities become endless. What a singular person can take away from one text is more skillful than anything they would gain from group work. The forced lessons learned from a solo engagement with literature are not lessons in reading comprehension or composition. They are lessons about how one can critique them self. They are lessons in reflection.
According to Harold Bloom in his introduction to Edith Grossman’s English translation of Don Quixote de la Mancha, Don Quixote holds the mirror not up to nature, but up to the reader. Anyone’s name is always their favorite word in the world so why would a mirror be any different? Vanity doesn’t have to be self-idolatry it can also be the pure aesthetic relationship with a book. Self-idolatry can be character idolatry because in actuality it’s the praise of literature. Don Quixote can bring out the emotions of a reader and in doing so it shows the power of what’s possible from literature engagement.
Chivalry may be thought on many levels but the action of it commands attention. Ideological protests are almost exactly the same thing. If a person has the passion to rally groups of people for action then how different is this idea from Don Quixote? Acting on beliefs for a cause inspires others to wonder about the worth of achieving that cause. For Don Quixote his causes are simple. Wright the wrongs of what he views need it. His passion lies in the will to act against everything and only upon his knowledge. His knowledge surely is taken with disbelief by others in every single one of his argument in the novel. “Only be sure that it is passion, that it does yield you this fruit of a quickened, multiplied, consciousness” is a statement written for the world but I see Don Quixote the only character able to do it (Pater). Don Quixote’s knowledge is a multiple consciousness. He acts with passion beyond reason except the knowledge of what he truly believes. Is there a possible lesson other than reading about his exploits that instill trustworthiness in one’s self? Chivalry is passion and action comes from trusting decisions based in knowledge. I’m just sorry people will not come to know this unless they yearn to engage with literature.
People often want to distinguish the difference between importance and anecdotal trivia. I’d like to state that everything that is or was important will be or was anecdotal at one time. Of course English majors are chalked up and catalogued as students of anecdotal knowledge. What happens when trivial knowledge gets taken out into the world with an English major? It gets used more than anything else. Stories create stories and anecdotal knowledge then becomes more useful in employment than knowing how operate a fork lift.
“Public relations” is a phrase used widely by a plethora of companies. What it really means is the ability to recognize and successfully interpret human needs. Without a public relation department a company would be without a voice. The skills of person having the background of literature engagement know what kind of a voice this should be. This “voice” for public relations is made only possible because it’s been a cultural discourse since the invention of the phrase “public relations.” It’s the voice of understanding what is needed and what is happening rhetorically within in social interaction. The voice is a collage of knowledge inside one’s mind that documents public commentary. Whether for a company’s purpose or self reflection, the voice inside one’s head comes from the mental engagement with literature. It’s not crazy it’s just addictive. What the instinctual draw is in engaging with prose and poetry is the yearn to feel any rhetorical significance, contemporary or historically.





Works consulted:




Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism. 1957 Princeton University Press. Princeton

Paperback Edition 1990.


Pater, Walter. “Conclusion from The Renaissance” 1873. Peace Corps Mauritania’s

Literary Magazine. Vol I. January 2003.


Sidney, Sir Philip. “An Apology for Poetry” The Norton Anthology of Theory and

Criticism. Ed.Vincent B. Leitch. 2001 W. W. Norton and Company Incorporated


Shelley, Percy Bysshe. “A Defence of Poetry” The Norton Anthology of Theory and

Criticism. Ed.Vincent B. Leitch. 2001 W. W. Norton and Company Incorporated.

The wattage of insight

I started to write my paper and I thought back how I've not memorized The Idea of Order at Key West. I've read through it many times and I still cannot come to one conclusion why the sea is the starting point for the song. I mean it is really possible to sing "beyond" the sea? We have a better map of the moon's dark side than we do of all the ocean's floor. It's very perplexing to me but then I suppose "the lights in the fishing boats anchored there" wouldn't look different, wouldn't feel different of even sound different. At the beginning of class I wanted to refute being able to sing above or beyond the sea. Now I'm reverent in arguing why we ever wouldn't sing with the sea as a backdrop for humanity. This may not make sense but it doesn't have too because questions are anything but and end. What I get from the poem is a regeneration of ideas. A reflection of how I would praise the nothingness and the everythingness the sea exudes. I get an idea to write a poem that may not seem like its has anything to do with the ocean. Yet, it does because I built every line off of the one line that mentions "sea" in it. It goes like this and I call it......Terracotta Daydreams-

In the future

There are water wars and tombstones on mars.

But who decides the epitaph of the aftermath?

After all it will be the first in the heavens from the earth.

Shall it really even be a stone?

Would terracotta be epitomizing or ironic or both?

Cemeteries and funerals of intergalactic tragedy

Are imminent because future explorers seek to see.

How will bodies decay in the red dirt?

Will we wrap their bodies in preserving bubble wrap?

Religions of many might just want their gods stamp on that wrap.

As the solar system waits stampeding human feet,

I digress out yearn for new tie dye space suits.

What other colors shall indicate and promote virgin atmospheric peace?

How soon will the fresh water of this world deplete?

These questions for just one more decade I’ll keep.

Years of remembrance much faster pass us by.

Sometimes I stick out my thumb or wave goodbye.

I wish earth could frequently idle.

But I suppose the stars wouldn’t twinkle.

Well, my fellow humans this week will end.

And what ever happens this evening

Don’t you force it mortal being!

Wait, wonder and dream without thinking

Because the people of tomorrow contend their most memorable advice

had always come in from a day of sailing

They said “let the sea indulge your vice."

So it must not matter if there are plans of terraforming,

Planet claiming or inevitable intergalactic globalization.

The future as it unfolds doesn’t need to track us in time.

It only matters momentarily our descendant’s tombstones shine.

So in the meantime, if the globe will allow I’ll just sway back into rest and recline.

it's been a while

I'm posting on the holiday because everyone is sleeping right now. I was scanning the house and I noticed most of the books in my folks house are either about Montana history or left over Spanish books from my dad's college days. I wish I could read Norwegian. When I was little my aunt would send us Norwegian children's books. I always loved flipping back through them. I have no idea what the content is but I can tell the story through the lovely photos. I know every other chapter is centered around a season. The fall seasons show little trolls chopping wood in late afternoon light with a very medieval looking axe. I especially like the winter chapter because the troll family has perhaps the coolest wooden ski sleds I've ever seen. The summer chapter has many trolls fishing and swimming but somehow I think the illustrations show some kind of conflict. They show the encroachment of different looking trolls. At least that is what I remember viewing when I was younger but now my perception is different. Flipping through it now I seem to notice the "other" trolls look like people with human qualities. It seems the encroachment of humans slowly forced the trolls deeper into the fjords. The last few illustrations of the children's book show the disguise of the trolls in daily summer life. It's Norse mythology I somehow understand without being able to read the language. It kind of makes me feel like Sancho. Exposed to something long enough and inevitably you will start to exude it's qualities. I used to think the books didn't show anything real but I now think differently. I'm sure they live in disguise in the world even if I can read their names or the dialogue on the page. The illustrations have been with me every holiday when I've been bored at home. In the time I do flip back I now know what "eternity within an hour" really is. If could read the language in the book I wouldn't have as much artistic allusion. What's left for me to interpret from foreign illustrations is the perpetual imagination of what I want them to be. I'm sure it'll change the next time I flip back through it but that's exactly what I want, nothing the same yet repeated again and again.

plerosis/ kenosis

You must view this image to grasp the differences in what humans feel when thinking about a glass half empty/ half full- It condeses many emotions about life into very entertaining themes- It's from threadless.com check it out ~>

thinking about the first half-

I finally made it! I'm half way through- The second part of the Ingenious Gentlemen, Don Quixote of La Mancha awaits me. I must say I feel odd about what I remember from the first part. At some points I was thoroughly intrigued by Quixote's rants. A other times I couldn't wait to read the reaction of other character's. Especially one of the latest scenes where Quixote says to the goatherd "You are a villain and a scoundrel, and you are the one who is vacant and foolish; I have more upstairs than the whore who ever bore you did" Wow- talk about intense insulting. Quixote crosses the line of flighting much too often. As least he may think most conversations are fun from the beginning. I think Sancho considers himself sane but I don't really want to regard him as realist. Even though that may be true I'd rather think of him as expected any friend would do in reaction to "real" social tensions. The first part of the novel I'm still letting incubate on my thoughts. As a reader responding, which is what I prefer to do before anything else- I think Don Quixote does not purposely step over his social boundaries but rather invites everyone to believe in chivalrous duty without being timid about the consequences. He knows what his doing, and he always accurately forecasts what anybody's response will be to his words. I think that's why his rants always come full circle. He insinuates a dire question and refutes his arguments that convey why he asks such questions in the first place. As far as having a critical literary theme to interpret the first have of the book I can't say any would be better than one another. New historicism might love the end notes but that almost would be reading rhetorically and commenting more on the references than the actual text itself. Psychoanalytic theory could have their way with Quixote but I'm sure nothing would be concretely accessible. For all of Don Quixote's rants that might help allude to a psychological condition I highly doubt any of those reasons would be a legitimate commentary. It's because all of Don Quixote's rants make sense. They all mean exactly what he means them to mean and to try and say they mean something else is ridiculous. Sancho is hooked by this. He is hooked how Quixote seems to make sense to himself but the world doesn't make sense of him. Being illiterate, Sancho sees the opportunity to become educated by an unconventional standard in the service of Don Quixote. So perhaps he is the first in the many groups of folk that will start to accept Quixote's quest. Of course I'm just speculating at this point but even if I'm wrong I know Sancho will learn something without realizing it.

Expressing life experience

I remember reading Washington Square by Henry James just last year. It's crazy how long it takes to think back on stuff which seems clearer the longer it resonates in the brain. James' prose it surprisingly quirky in that old proper sort of way. I'll just say the book ends not how one would think it to end. I'm not very knowledgeable about " the madness of art." I have found that it relates to a psychotherapy- "the need to transform and metamorphose personal experience by means of prose, poetry, or other artistic expression" as in the artist using their depression/rage of life to control the experience of aging without the experiences they wanted to have. That's according to the American Psychiatric Association so it might be a little removed from the "goals" of thinking about it for English 300's purposes. To think about art (literature) as expressions of personal experience surely promotes and endless forum for "transforming" what life is and turns it into everything that's it's not. What I mean by this is expressing life experience in literary works changes what the experience actually was into the experience of feeling the life in the experience. James may allude that the madness about art perhaps might be the irony that art produces more feeling about life that life itself. Sure, this notion can used to psychoanalyze the person producing the experience but in no way can it summarize the feeling of the expression in art.

After Blake

After class today I wanted more. I know the Blakean notion of innocence to experience will continue to label the ideas we refer to in class from time to time but cannot we not dwell just on the experience? I feel like jumping right into talking about Blake to better explain the grand significance of reading as child does have relevance to what learning is but I really want to stop just before we get there. Intertextuality, the sublime, structuralism and biographical accuracy all come from dwelling solely on the experience. Of course, some would say because something is learned from the literature but why not stay there and praise the experience. I feel like cataloguing the experience with innocence takes away from what one thinks about immediately following a reading as the experience. It takes one away from their thoughts and thrusts the Revelation of the "lesson" to be more significant than all others. I may be completely out of my league in trying to separate experience from innocence but I know I'm not alone. If experience an innocence cannot be separable from one another in an overall theme than neither can hope and expectation be. Hope and expectation are two very different things and seldom it is than humans keeps them separate. What I'd like to say about them is that expectation supersedes hope in reading. When the "experience" of reading sets in we're"expected" to learn something not "hope" that we do. Thus experience invokes expectation and innocence demonstrates a hope of something. I want to stick with the notion of experience before taking about going into anything else. I suppose Sancho Panza might operate in a similar way before the end of the novel. He might expect his master to do something before he hopes he does in due time. Maybe that's what I really wanted more from class today. A little willing skepticism about Sancho's "learned" motivations.

Lesson Plans of the Past

The Little film about Little Books I saw not that long ago. I don't think I have laughed so whole heatedly in a while as I did watching moments of the film. Some very intriguing clips from passages in the books and the way in which they represent life at that time was a lesson for me in itself. Noticing how some names where capitalized and others weren't is particularly interesting when some of the books talked about the bible. I remember books growing up and the ones I remember the most had personified animals in them. This seems a very old and successful idea for children lesson plans. I had to laugh about how accurate some of the books lessons where about the dangers in daily life. "Don't drink from a hot tea pot! Don't get crushed under a horse carriage!" I think the illustrations got to me because I cannot think of any type today that can match there "true accuracy" about life danger lessons. I'm not sure at what point a child reads for inquiry beyond what their given to know. The film captures this idea of a child growing in knowledge beyond the letters and pages of early learning. It shows the wanderlust of a world apart from the household. In turn it also shows the construction of the little books and critiques societal thought about that world without saying anything, just showing the pages and clips of passages. It reminds me of reading old national geographic magazines. The spectrum of geographic study is very different from the 1940s contrasted with the 1980s. It's different because we learn more and different because we don't remember what we learn but in fact relearn what was forgotten. A little bit like a centrifugal lesson according to.....what his name again? Well, that's my most prominent thought about the film so far but I'm sure many connections will be made to Don Quixote as I try to read six hundred pages in due time.

(more)

After reviewing what I had scrambled down for notes today I think I could have done pretty well if it were a pop-quiz. True, not much about Don Quixote was said in Lu of questioning for the exam. Frye, sure was. I'm not to the Canon character in the novel yet. I just finished the chapter were Quixote set free the men from in route to the galley's. I thought more would develop from the interest of Quixote in the guy whose history is still being written. For sure, I thought Quixote and that guy were going to team up. In all that Quixote said about the unjustified punishments, it was pretty bold an arrogant. There might be a difference between those two terms but Quixote doesn't make it easy to define the difference. As a character his actions are very bold and his vocal suggestions or more accurately demands, are come off very arrogant to the others characters in the novel. I've seen the musical and one thing I remember most is the expression of Sancho's face while Quixote continues speaking anything and everything that's on his mind to others. While reading I imagine this vividly and it may be something I've brought to the novel but I'm not sure yet. In fact, I'm quite sure a lot of knowledge I have about the world will connect in some kind of way with Cervantes' dianoia's as E.M. Forster has said.

tuesday-

I'm trying to remember all what was said in class discussion yesterday and I got to thinking about what the variety of questions will be for the test. A vast range of interests I'm sure will construct a most challenging exam. Well, maybe not too challenging because I want to pass. I feel like Frye's theory of modes is father back in the semester than it should be. Although we allude to Fyre's graph of modes and strive to place whatever idea we talk about into it, I'm still wondering where Catcher in the Rye would fit. I feel it kind of belongs in the low mimetic/thematic box but I'm not sure. Would that be placing a kind of modernist notion in a low mimetic? I mean if certain texts that we know kind of exemplify a literary idea does it help to place it into Frye's method for understanding modes or not? Again tonight I had Quixote pop into my head while reading for another class. I kind of chuckled about my thoughts too. I tried to imagine what the sum of Don Quixote and the Terminator would be. If Quixote can get beat up constantly and come back to life in a somewhat coherent state then he must posses some kind of super human endurance or android regenerative qualities. If the Terminator comes from the future with apocalyptic news then I'd like to bet (apart from the story in the movie) that the loss of chivalry must have something to do with it. Even though many of Quixote's engagements with the "enemy" seem ridiculous we must wonder how what he actually forecasts in his mind might be more dangerous than the reality Sancho sees him in, for now. Maybe that will be my question- If Don Quixote engaged the Terminator what would happen? Would Quixote accuse him of possessing his amour or would the Terminator surrender and take over Sancho's duties and service Quixote in his exploits? Answer- both

Amost getting it-

Page 119 is rich in Frye- "Rituals cluster around the cyclical movement of the sun, the seasons and human life." "Recurrence and desire interpenetrate" I don't think I understand what Frye means as concretely as he did but in trying to think about how the archetypal phase of symbols works I somewhat get it. The traditions of rituals in conjunction with what is happening in nature surely operate in side by side. It helps to think about the rhetorical political landscape and how words refer to the natural shift in things. Words and phrase captured by the media or more accurately edited by the media play on the "motifs and themes" that are most likely to fuse with a particular human emotion. It almost seems for me that in Frye's theory of symbols the formal stage is really fused more with the archetypal stage before anything else. Although understanding the formal phase or any other stage for that matter requires comprehension of examples it nevertheless operates hidden in daily rhetoric. Well, maybe not hidden but spoken plainly without hinting at what language is referring to directly. So far I may have convincing myself that this happens but not until others might suggest similar instances in class.

How do symbols form?

I understand what Frye has to say in his "Theory of Symbols" from a few examples I've read so far. He mentions that a dictionary would be useless if we did not already have some knowledge of others words. I understand this notion to be explained further in thinking about how we can't totally comprehend the meaning of a word until we picture it. We do not have a complete understanding until the picture or "symbol" gives us an image to base a definition or description of off. Even then it's still a continuing form and shape that floats aimlessly until we attach it the best definition of it we view as the most qualified. Frye uses a cat as a symbol that is broad enough to float through different meanings and different personal attachments to the symbolic meaning. At times a symbol gets confusing in how the text means to show it or how the author of the text meant to use the symbol in relations in textual imagery. "The reality-principle is subordinate to the pleasure-principle" can sum up all that is learned when constructing a symbol in reading literature. It seems that a common reaction to that phrase would be "of course!" It may not be though. If literature at it's most basic operation in the universe "instructs and entertains" then why do we need answers to know which comes first? The pleasure in being entertained surely dominates the recognition of feeling more knowledgeable while reading. In a way it also disguises infusing knowledge while being entertained. In thinking about how we forms symbols or how the symbols form the meaning of what we read I would recommend consulting your consciousness differently. Don't think about how the symbol comes to makes sense after reading, think about how the symbol makes more sense as the reading continues. It makes more sense because a symbol has multiple meanings and it would be impossible to dissect which ones induce the pleasure-principle and which ones induce the reality-principle or the learning principle.

Missing Cervantes

I just spent three hours ready fifty pages of Faulkner. The whole time I wish I was reading Cervantes. I miss Don Quixote. I miss reading about his mind when I'm forced to read something I really can't seem to find relevant to my education. Reading Faulkner is not what I imagined taking most of time this semester. I did not think most of my time reading any assignment would morph into ponder what reading in Don Quixote lies ahead of me. I think the class discussion about the essence of what constitutes a comic book hero provoked me to wonder exactly how Don Quixote is one. If that's true then do all the other characters have less than heroic implications and ideals in the novel? I suppose not but what is their purpose? It's odd that I feel kind of sad for Don Quixote at times but I always seem to side with the other characters before I truly believe his thoughts. I don't why. I really wish I could remember anything I've just read in Absalom Absalom moments ago. I shouldn't fret though because I know I now have a yearn to read Cervantes. Whether it is a yearn to read in spite of something else or a yearn to just return to a world in a book that is suspended from the norm, I don't know. It's probably both and that might be a good thing. I feel some reading always is accompanied with a spiteful attitude. In the case of reading Don Quixote that spiteful attitude turns into many attitudes or perceptions about reality. While reading Cervantes, perceptions about daily interactions seem less important. Perceptions about life seem to only matter in regards to what happens to Don Quixote's life. This is what I know after reading Faulkner. Bazaar eh?

I. A. Richards

"Almost no contemporary critic has written without being touched by Richards at some point" has been said about I.A. Richards in regards to influence on others. Richards believed that a comprehensible approach to literary criticism would need to be placed upon reason in a a more "scientific approach to it". His ideas helped harbor the "new criticism" into the vast philosophy of viewing the text differently than as before. To "construct a less subjective standard of literary value" is one of his major themes in striving to put old opinions away in thinking about a text. It reminds me in thinking about the low mimetic/ thematic box of Frye's criticism works to illustrated this notion. The separation from the dominant order is clearly a method that Richards has created for criticism. The individuality of separating from the older or traditional approaches to a text create a new approach. Richards also wrote poetry revealing "new insights into himself well into his old age". His was very active in mountaineering and traveling but I can't really think of any Brit than isn't at some point in their life. One thing that is most disagreeable with Richards is his idea that world problems could be reduced through the promotion of English. Although his work with linguists and suggesting a "basic English" vocabulary is commendable, history since the publishing of his book So Much Nearer has taken a different view. History has also been taken his "new critical literary" approach as one of the founding ideas as new method.

Critical Inquiry

It's always a skeptical moment the first day of class but I don't suppose that is a bad thing if we are all to promote the critic within us. I've read some Frye and I've read some Bloom but I've never owned a book with both their names on the cover. I say "Preposterous"! Why would Harold Bloom do such a thing? Bloom has his own set of ideological blurbs. Why would he want to lay his in addition with someone else. I think I'm a little shaken up from last semester and my engagement with Bloom somehow seems to reignite itself after I saw his name again.
Apart from my little blurb I'm here and eager to swim amongst the various schools of criticism and experience treading water in their particularities. If it so happens that our envelopment in Don Quixote hosts different avenues of different critical inquiries than I believe treading water in literary theory will be ever so refreshing.
If "The Idea of Oder at Key West" helps us navigate the chaos that critical inquiry inspires than I'll wait and listen to all the other students until I'm as comfortable as they in comprehending how that poem helps define our subject matter.