[lbo-talk] compare and contrast

[Carrol Cox]

Yeah -- "gratification theory" doesn't belong in serious company -- it's a
mere bit of self-important cynicism from some "theorist." I should have
underlined that Kincaid's argument is NOT an insult to the reader; it is a
proposition about how _anyone_ must, willy-nilly, proceed in the  construal
of a text. Texts are intrinsically incoherent, and for that reason to make
sense of them the reader must impose her own coherence. "Gratification
theory" belongs in locker-room slang, not serious thinking. This need to
impose coherence is a frustration more than a gratification. Awareness of it
should generate some humility rather than cynical sneers at _other_ people.

Carrol

-----Original Message-----
From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
On Behalf Of Dennis Claxton
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 10:25 PM
To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] compare and contrast

On 4/30/2012 9:46 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:


> The "theory" Wojtek refers to is commonplace among many literary scholars
> and has been for some time.

It sounds like cultural studies/lit crit, or even the dreaded pomo(run 
away, run away!) without the flavored center that makes it interesting 
and fulfilling.  Like a cookie someone has eaten the stuffing from.

And "uses and gratification theory"?  There's a name guaranteed to keep 
them out of the tent.
___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk