
Disclaimer: Posting something to this site does not mean that I necessarily agree with or endorse the opinions being expressed therein. The articles I link to here are meant only to inform and inspire thought and discussion, but they are absolutely not meant to be taken as my personal or professional opinion on any particular issue.
Years ago, when I was teaching in the legendary English Department at SUNY/Buffalo, one of our poets, Jerry Maguire,convoked a group to read poems. Jerry’s idea was to bring poets and critics together in order to compare their readings.
What happened surprised me, at least, and, I think, just about everybody in the group. It turned out that poets and critics read poems quite differently.
The critics concerned themselves with things like repetitions and contrasts of themes and meanings. The poets, however, paid attention to repetitions and contrasts of vowels and consonants, rhythmic patterns, and all kinds of features of the sound of the poems. To be sure, there was a certain amount of overlap, but nevertheless, the poets and the critics were reading poems quite differently.
Now, it turns out, they may have been using different systems in their brains. Kenneth Heilman, a neuropsychologist at the University of Florida, has a fine paper setting out the “information-processing approach” to the various aphasias. He lists eleven different aphasias, and his paper uses the kind of block diagrams computer programmers use to distinguish and interrelate them…
Why project so negatively on critics? The article (though I only read the blurb on my dashboard, I’ll admit) is using...
@learningtosee: i might suggest that a translator—an excellent one, anyway—probably thinks like both the critic and the...
its worth following...times….now if someone would please track down
Ya know, there are a lot of us out there who are both.
this surprises… who?
My philosophy professor...commenting on something similar
Might explain those breakdowns...those literary-artsy types…