Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Glyerian Re: [mythsoc] New Screwtape

Expand Messages
  • Elizabeth Apgar Triano
    Thank you. I must have missed the name, but I would like to read about the gestalt theory (so to speak). I did not come up with a lot on amazon. I am
    Message 1 of 4 , Mar 25, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Thank you. I must have missed the name, but I would like to read about the
      gestalt theory (so to speak). I did not come up with a lot on amazon. I
      am finding other hits but suspect I could get lost pretty fast, as I am not
      at all familiar with her. Can you give me the citation again please?

      Lizzie

      Elizabeth Apgar Triano
      lizziewriter@...
      amor vincit omnia
      www.lizziewriter.com
      www.danburymineralogicalsociety.org

      >
      > In the manner of Diana Pavlac Glyer, the scholar whom both Wendell and I
      > cited earlier as discussing mutual influence among the Inklings in a sense
      > broader than that of "tending towards similarity."
      >
      > David Bratman
      >
      >
    • David Bratman
      Diana Glyer s main work to date is her thesis, which is not published, nor exactly easy for the average person not connected with a university to borrow. Nor
      Message 2 of 4 , Mar 27, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Diana Glyer's main work to date is her thesis, which is not published, nor
        exactly easy for the average person not connected with a university to
        borrow. Nor is it her easiest work to read.

        If you have Mythlore 80, the Tolkien Centenary Conference Proceedings (the
        only issue of Mythlore out of print, as it happens), she has a very good
        and very readable article in that.

        If you want to read a readable, non-stuffy book on the kinds of literary
        influence that she's talking about, she would recommend _Collaborative
        Circles_ by Michael P. Farrell, which actually discusses the Inklings,
        though it won't tell you anything Humphrey Carpenter doesn't. But it does
        put them in an interesting context of other literary groups.

        David Bratman


        At 05:08 PM 3/25/2005 -0500, Lizzie wrote:
        >
        >
        >Thank you. I must have missed the name, but I would like to read about the
        >gestalt theory (so to speak). I did not come up with a lot on amazon. I
        >am finding other hits but suspect I could get lost pretty fast, as I am not
        >at all familiar with her. Can you give me the citation again please?
      • WendellWag@aol.com
        You should realize that I created the word Glyerian myself. I first used it several years ago when I asked Diana a question after one of her talks at
        Message 3 of 4 , Mar 27, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          You should realize that I created the word "Glyerian" myself. I first used
          it several years ago when I asked Diana a question after one of her talks at
          Mythcon. She doesn't even claim to have created the idea of looking for
          influence in larger ways than mere similarity. She named somebody else who had
          done similar work before her, but I've forgotten the name she mentioned. I'm
          not sure whether calling this a "gestalt" theory is very useful. In any
          case, I was half-joking in using the word, not claiming that there's a big
          critical movement out there.

          Wendell Wagner


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • David Bratman
          ... That s correct. ... There are about four scholars who ve done major work in this area that she s cited a lot. Of these, Michael Farrell (the one I cited
          Message 4 of 4 , Mar 27, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            At 02:03 PM 3/27/2005 -0500, Wendell Wagner wrote:

            >She doesn't even claim to have created the idea of looking for
            >influence in larger ways than mere similarity.

            That's correct.

            >She named somebody else who had
            >done similar work before her, but I've forgotten the name she mentioned.

            There are about four scholars who've done major work in this area that
            she's cited a lot. Of these, Michael Farrell (the one I cited in my post
            to Lizzie) is by far the most easily accessible to a lay reader.

            >I'm not sure whether calling this a "gestalt" theory is very useful.

            I agree, since this is about the individual scholars' work in community,
            not about whether the community has a larger existence beyond the people
            who make it up. The latter question has been addressed by some other
            scholars, though, including, of all people, Alfred Kroeber (Ursula K. Le
            Guin's father).

            David Bratman
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.