On Thursday, November 18, 2004 at 5:27:17 PM UTC-8, Francis A. Miniter wrote:
OFurorHortensis wrote:
Rubard opined:
The function of literature, the basis of its cultivation by humanity, is
clearly not solely a matter of enjoyment.
I abjure this Roundhead hooey, and all those who find it necessary to seek to
redeem art by freighting it with trite notions of utility. Pfui. Pfui. Pfui.
Phuror
Hooray! To me the "function" of literature and art is simply to make you feel and think.
Though re-reading what I just wrote makes me feel uneasily like one of Socrates'
partners in dialogue. I am just waiting for the devastating question to come along such as:
Socrates: My dear friend, do you think that art should make one feel any feeling at all or should it be a noble feeling?
To which I would answer:
FAM: In my humble opinion, Socrates, the ability of art to move one to any feeling is its unique characteristic. It does not matter whether the feeling is
anger or joy. For, indeed, Socrates, at our own Festival of Dionysus each year
do we not begin with a tragedy, then present a comedy before the second tragedy
of the day, then a second comedy before the final tragedy of the day? So do we
not commend the playwright who is capable of moving the audience through a wide
range of emotion and thought?
Francis A. Miniter
2022 Update: Class act. Q: Does it matter whether he "approves" or "disapproves"?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)