posted
Actually, I think the lit minors only got a simplified version of it. Some Freud, some Jung, not much else. A little bit of old New Criticism and some feminism, maybe.
When you go to grad school for lit, you get a snap-on attachment that allows you to switch paradigms at will. Sadly, mine has an ugly crack in it.
posted
You know what? The critics were RIGHT to trash him. Stephen king tells great stories... but he can't write for beans.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's actually a thread with that debate on it. Of course, I'm not the thread police (now there's a title to have!) I disagree with you, of course. But I don't feel like debating it here.
Actually, according to my sources at The New Yorker, as part of his payment for the last short story of his they printed (back in July, I believe), he received a 14 pound bag of anasazi pink heirloom beans. He uses them to add texture and color to his famous "Stay on the Path of the Bean" chili.
EDIT: 14 pound 'bag' -- not 'back.' Although that reminds me --- ribs, mmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
posted
I was an English Major, but I think they handed out the rings the day we discussed Portnoy's Complaint, which I skipped.
Posts: 1652 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: The hilarious thing is that most of King's critics would probably praise Edgar Allan Poe as an important American writer -- even though his most noted work is definitely in the oogly-boogly category. He's been dead long enough for the stink of popularity to have faded, apparently.
I love the fact that he said "oogly-boogly." Kills me! Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
at Taberah!![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
