> Obviously a lot of people *like* reading this
> stuff and get something out of it. Like Doug asked, why can't people
> just shrug their shoulders and move on?
>
>
For reasons I already explained.
I like Shelley's work, for instance, and don't like seeing it mangled.
I think certain kinds of ways of thinking are harmful, at least to thinking about poetry and history, if not in other ways.
I don't like institutions that perpetuate intellectual priesthoods.
I am trying to write about historical and literary phenomena, in a way, and with words, that brings to mind the way words are used by the people who write "this stuff", and I need to critique "this stuff" in order to do what I hope to do with some credibility.
All of which, and more, I have explained before, perhaps inadequately, but I have no substantive response from anyone.
I understand if you don't want to read me in all of my puffiness, but please don't pretend I haven't tried to answer such questions. If I have done so inadequately please show me where. I don't mind being show where I have gone wrong.
Do you think that you have addressed anything by pulling a phrase out about "vision"? Then substitute "way of understanding" or "working method". (But of course the word "way" should be put in quotes because it refers to "travel" and "walking" and the world "understanding" must be put into quote, because it means something like "foundation" or even "ground" and has been "critiqued" by Heidegger among others.)
See previous posts. Or if you wish I will also write to you a post about the "vision" thing.
Jerry Monaco