Re: lit curriculum

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Lolita"
• Previous message: Matthew_Stevenson@baylor.edu: "Re: ever so 'umble"
• Maybe in reply to: WILL HOCHMAN: "lit curriculum"

WILL HOCHMAN wrote:
> I confess to being glad with never having to read Henry James again (with
> the possible exception of "The Turn of the Screw") (And I studied with
the
> fellow who studied with Leon Edel)(Whose critical work about James is
> really more readable than James...)(Now William James is something else
> entirely).

Year before last I did a whole course on Henry James, taught by a guy who's
somewhat of an expert. I didn't mind `The Princess Cassamasima' or `Daisy
Miller' (James' habit of completely revising his works from earlier periods
seemed a bit anal though) but `The Golden Bowl' was so unfathomable that
even the teacher threw his hands up and vowed never to teach it again.

Camille
verona_beach@geocities.com
@ THE ARTS HOLE http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442
@ THE INVERTED FOREST http://www.angelfire.com/pa/invertedforest

• Next message: Camille Scaysbrook: "Lolita"
• Previous message: Matthew_Stevenson@baylor.edu: "Re: ever so 'umble"
• Maybe in reply to: WILL HOCHMAN: "lit curriculum"