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

Re: Zipes on Stockton, Baum

Expand Messages
  • William Cloud Hicklin
    ... American ... the ... to ... Oz_, ... ruin by ... life. ... fairy ... Does Zipes realize that the Oz-as-political-fable business is an urban legend with
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 15, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, David Lenander <d-lena@...>
      wrote:

      >
      > It is not by chance that the most notable and memorable
      American
      > fairy tale was produced right at the end of the nineteenth
      century:
      > L. Frank Baum's _The Wizard of Oz_ (1900), clearly based on
      the
      > European fairy tale structure, . . . . Though Dorothy returns
      to
      > America, she realizes in the sixth book, _The Emerald City of
      Oz_,
      > that she cannot stay in a country where farmers are driven to
      ruin by
      > bankers, and exploitation is accepted as "the American way of
      life."
      > Baum's creation of fourteen Oz books, considered an American
      fairy
      > tale saga, is a political and cultural commentary


      Does Zipes realize that the Oz-as-political-fable business is an
      urban legend with very traceable roots? I find it very unlikely
      that the arch-Republican Baum would have intended anything like
      what Zipes reads into him. Then again, I seriously doubt most
      authors intended the political content modern litcrit reads into
      them.
    • Merlin DeTardo
      Ah, but don t many modern litarary critics dismiss an author s intentions as unimportant? As suggested, for example, in this wikipedia entry on intentional
      Message 2 of 4 , Jan 15, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Ah, but don't many modern litarary critics dismiss an author's
        intentions as unimportant? As suggested, for example, in this
        wikipedia entry on "intentional fallacy"?

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_fallacy

        And here's some blogging on the subject by Richard Scott Nokes in
        what started as a discussion of Tolkien (regarding his use of the
        word "weapontake"):

        http://unlocked-wordhoard.blogspot.com/2005/11/intentionally-
        omitted.html

        http://unlocked-wordhoard.blogspot.com/2005/11/intention-what-did-he-
        know-and-when.html

        -Merlin DeTardo


        >---"William Cloud Hicklin" <solicitr@...> wrote:
        >Then again, I seriously doubt most authors intended the political
        content modern litcrit reads into them.
      • William Cloud Hicklin
        ... in ... the ... did-he- ... Quite so- but many modern literary critics are full of garden fertilizer. Personally, I ll stick with old-fashioned authors
        Message 3 of 4 , Jan 15, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, "Merlin DeTardo" <emptyD@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Ah, but don't many modern litarary critics dismiss an author's
          > intentions as unimportant? As suggested, for example, in this
          > wikipedia entry on "intentional fallacy"?
          >
          > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_fallacy
          >
          > And here's some blogging on the subject by Richard Scott Nokes
          in
          > what started as a discussion of Tolkien (regarding his use of
          the
          > word "weapontake"):
          >
          > http://unlocked-wordhoard.blogspot.com/2005/11/intentionally-
          > omitted.html
          >
          > http://unlocked-wordhoard.blogspot.com/2005/11/intention-what-
          did-he-
          > know-and-when.html
          >


          Quite so- but "many modern literary critics" are full of garden
          fertilizer. Personally, I'll stick with old-fashioned "authors"
          as opposed to deterministic "author functions."
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.