"John Husvar" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

"Tom Quackenbush" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
snip
I gave Marie a gentle tweak. [...]

Jeez, Ed, that could appear incriminating if someone were to take it
out of context. Not that anyone would.

You're really on a roll in this thread. Maybe you should invite
Marie to stick around. It'd take some of the pressure off Gunner and
maybe some a that there culture would rub off on the rest of us.

Well, the culture part is easy. When someone does a deconstruction or
other
post-modernist critique of literature, you can count on their
concluduing
two things: First, the author did not say what he thinks he said.
Second, if
the author is a white male, the true meaning of the writing involves
suppression of minorities and/or women.

It's easy if you keep those two things in mind.


Congratulations! You have just qualified for a Ph.D. in Contemporary
Literary Analysis, and possibly an J.D.

Either requires an ability to conclude a writer did not write what he
wrote, but what the critic thinks he wrote, and certainly did not write
what he meant, but what the critic thinks he must have meant.

Ha! Of course, we're not really being fair, but this is such a strange and
arcane field that it's easy to take pot-shots at it.

In any case, it's not one for this NG. There is OT, and there is
Off-The-Planet. This one is OTP.

If you happen to be into it, though, sometime when you're Googling, go to
Google Book Search and type in "Ed Huntress," in quotes. There you'll see a
note from the author of _Koolaids: The Art of War_, in which he's a bit
over-gracious in crediting me with "teaching him what good writing is." g
In fact, what I tried to do was to steer him away from bad post-modernism
and towards some very good post-modernism. So then he wrote a wildly
post-modernist book, which Amy Tan, among others, thought was brilliant but
which I can hardly follow. d8-)

Oh, well.

--
Ed Huntress