> CB: Of course, debates about Milton, Shakespeare, Jesus or Aristotle
> are fresh as daisies and oh so intellectually on time.+
1. The inclusion of Jesus in this list makes it incoherent: for the Christian such debates are not about the past but about the present (God is always there or not). So we will confine the discussion to Milton, Shakespeare, or Aristotle
^^^^^ CB: I'm in favor of discussing all that I listed. I just am in favor of discussing the struggle between fascism and socialism , too, because it _is_ still pertinent to what we are trying to do today, as pertinent as discussing all of the above.
^^^^^^^^
2. There are almost never debates about Aristotle bu only about Aristotelian thought, a debate no cluttered with artguments about his character or whether he was in the pay of Alexander, etc. His thought is current.
^^^^ CB: Marxism Leninism is current in that sense.
^^^^^
In so far as it isn't participants in any debate on him usually share perception on what parts of his thought are and are not of current importance and debate only the former.
3. Some debates about Milton do resemble debates re Trotsky & Stalin -- i.e., attitudes towards the execution of Charles I (which Milton defended) have or are thouyght to have current political rlevance. I doubt this, but obviously others do not, and hence these debates can develop some of the same rancor that T/S debates develop.
4. Reading Milton & Shakespeare are current events. Discussion of that writing involves the readers, directly r indirectly, not the persons of the writers.
In short, your attempt at a comparison limps badly.
^^^^^^^ CB: Your comment is based on the false assumption that I'm saying Shakespeare et al. shouldn't be discussed. I'm saying they should be discussed. The issues of WWII ( "Stalinist/Nazis slap fight brewing"; not identical with "Stalin/Trotsky")) are not "old" or less important than discussing Milton, Shakespeare or Aristotle.