[lbo-talk] Texas school board drops Jefferson, adds Calvin

[C. G. Estabrook]

Come on, Doug.  We were both there and know that pomo was never a coherent set 
of doctrines or even a collection of specific readings (as, e.g., at another 
extreme New Criticism was).  Mentioning Foucault and Butler is not enough.

It was the pomoists who "didn't engage actual texts"; Eagleton certainly did.

--CGE

Doug Henwood wrote:
> 
> On Mar 22, 2010, at 2:52 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> 
>> Insofar as that's so, it stems from the now-deceased pomo's being much 
>> more a mood and an attitude in various lit & social science faculties, 
>> than a defense of certain texts and ideas therein contained.
> 
> That's just what Eagleton said, and it's nonsense. I often found the 
> atmosphere in the graduate lounge at the UVa English department annoying 
> - a friend decided to drop out of the program after he heard someone 
> described in a conversation there as "doing interesting new work on 
> Tennyson's letters - but I never wrote a book about it. What kind of 
> critic doesn't engage actual texts, and prefers instead to go after a 
> disembodied "mood"? A lazy one? Or worse?
> 
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk