(On some browsers you'll need to refresh this page in order to see the comment you just left.)
iwombat - 2006-03-28 15:55:51
I went to MOMA yesterday, and similarly, I don't like to use the audio, I think if I went back a second time, I might, but just like video killed the pop star (or something like that) language can overwhelm visuals, and a too literal analysis can sap the poetry and deeper meaning from a more complex text.
But Huxley, I haven't read him since I was a teenager, and I'm afraid that he was one of the authors who was sacrificed to my need to be precocious, and to read intellegent books even when I didn't really understand them ( well maybe a little ).
-------------------------------
iwombat - 2006-03-28 15:58:41
oops, I spelled intelligent wrong.
-------------------------------
Paula - 2006-03-28 16:03:00
Wombat, I have the opposite relationship to Huxley: he was the author sacrificed to the stoners and Doors fans in high school. I don't even think I've read BNW.
But the few things I have read by him, now as an adult, I've enjoyed very much.
There's also a bit of the Allan Watts about him--proper, educated British fellow messing about with Eastern philosphy in a way that couldn't save his life. But I may be projecting here--I really don't know all that much about his life.
-------------------------------
2fs - 2006-03-28 16:41:50
dry, cold analysis or historical context? I've never understood that: historical context in particular can bring dry, cold poetry or philosophy roaring to life, once you know where and how the person who wrote the poetry or philosophy etc. came from, the conditions that surrounded the person. Even "analysis" can do that: understanding how something works is a mode of joy, I'd say. I think the problem is when people use those tools as a means of attack, as a means of rendering them faulty or irrelevant or something. For me, at least, knowing the ingredients to something delicious doesn't diminish my enjoyment - quite the contrary!
-------------------------------
Joe - 2006-03-29 17:07:27
But isn't it better to taste w/o knowing the ingredients, and then ask if you're interested? That way, you're completely surprised by the dish and can experience it in its totality and as a new thing, rather than be focused on its parts.
-------------------------------
Paula - 2006-03-29 17:09:40
That's the way I roll, too, Joe.
-------------------------------
Tim W. - 2006-03-29 18:42:12
It's taken me years of therapy just to get to the point where I can skip the acknowledgments. No way am I ready to skip introductions yet.
-------------------------------
add your comment:
back to the entry - Diaryland
