Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2001 :: March ::
Re: Authorial Intention
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0653  Tuesday, 20 March 2001

[1]     From:   Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 16 Mar 2001 08:53:55 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0643 Re: Authorial Intention

[2]     From:   R. A. Cantrell <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 16 Mar 2001 13:23:53 -0600
        Subj:   SHK 12.0643 Re: Authorial Intention

[3]     From:   John Robinson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 16 Mar 2001 22:51:23 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0643 Re: Authorial Intention


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 16 Mar 2001 08:53:55 -0800
Subject: 12.0643 Re: Authorial Intention
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0643 Re: Authorial Intention

Clifford Stetner writes that

>I hardly need to point out the paradox that the assertion that time
>spent in theory is not well spent is itself theory.

This paradox depends on conflating two notions of theory.  One meaning
of theory is the obvious one, to which Clifford alludes earlier in his
post, as involving the study of all great thinkers, and of any sort of
thought of sufficient complexity and abstraction.  It can also, however,
indicate a set of more or less mutually supporting ideas, nicely
described in a recent number of the University of Toronto Quarterly by
Graham Good, a professor here at UBC.

Conflating the two (rather different) meanings under the single term
seems to provide 'theory' with most of its rhetorical power, implying
that disagreement with the dogmas of the contemporary academy is
tantamount to not thinking at all.

Cheers,
Se

 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.