linguistics... websites ... art
- In a message dated 03/07/2000 8:31:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
<< Yes, linguistics is that kind of science. Pei's books are pre-generative
grammar, and while you don't need to know all the details of generative
grammar, you should know of its existence. >>
Or then again, I could give up. Struck out a few times today. LOL.
It could get expensive hanging out here, there are so many tantalizing book
titles bandied about.
On another note, I went to one of the sites mentioned in an earlier post, the
one about what makes Harry Potter so tasty. I read part of it, only part,
must admit didn't go all the way through. I have a problem with these kinds
of analyses. Unless it diverged from the typical path later on, this kind of
article seldom leaves room for the talent of the individual writer. I mean,
you could take all those elements they mentioned, the orphan thing and the
special scar thing and so on, and let a different writer go at it, and you'd
have different results. I don't think things can always be so quantified and
I still want to look at the Susan Cooper site.
And what about straight art? Does anyone else like Susan Seddon Boulet?
What about Ann Paxton? (http://members.aol.com/annpaxton/index.html).
Stevie Nicks (a popular girl rocker, well not a girl, maybe a woman?) has
said she drew inspiration from Sulamuth (Sulamith?) Wulfing's art.
I know I have strong reactions to artists that portray Tolkien stuff.
Usually negative ones. LOL. But I do like Pauline Baynes. And Tolkien