Quote:
Originally Posted by jallanite
That no-one here has commented on my post suggests that you may be right, that no-one feels they are allowed to join in to criticize a famous Tolkien scholar like Drout or perhaps they dont want to criticize me.
|
Well I know for my part that I didn't comment simply because I don't have anything to contribute. I wouldn't feel any reluctance to criticise Drout simply because he's famous.
Regarding Bloom, I'm aware that he's voiced similar objections regarding the
Harry Potter books. Now regardless of whether or not one likes
Harry Potter, what baffles me is why on earth serious academics waste their time writing and publishing on why books are "good" or "bad" or "should" or "should not" be read. These are pointless subjective criteria which can't be proved. It's the same case with Drout trying to explain why some readers don't "like" Tolkien. Who cares? Or if people do, surely it's a matter for psychology and cultural studies, not English scholars. I feel like academics (myself included) should be exploring new ways of thinking about texts, ways of reading them and so on, a myriad of scholarly activities other than going on about subjective appreciation.
But I suppose that's the kind of sensationalism that gets articles written about it (and irritated forum posts like this) and sells books.
On my blog I review TV shows, books, films and so on, but in an informal way, because I don't think matters of taste are a really a very scholarly issue. I didn't really enjoy
Ulysses when I read it and I find the works of Henry James rather tedious. It doesn't mean I'm going to write a thesis on "why
What Maisie Knew" is boring or how "people who like
Ulysses are wrong." It'd be absurd.