Can we distinguish the experience of a drama (as we are watching it) from the subsequent reflections upon it?
Can we distinguish "what does it mean?" from "what does it mean regarding the question of XXX?" And can we distinguish between what the author intends while producing the work, from what he says he intended in a conversation after the work was completed? I make all three of those distinctions. Dramas have often been especially useful over the ages to exemplify ideas - and yet stories from the Bible or Ramayana have still not been replaced by explications of their meaning. I introduced "The Wire", not to explain its meaning, but to exemplify the same kind of institutional compromise that I'm finding in Berger's discussion of Rembrandt, and the producer's commentary helps validate that analogy. I.e. -- academicians like Berger compromise scholarship for the sake of institutional advancement, just as the politicians and police compromise their professions for the sake of their careers in "The Wire". Which is not far different, Cheerskep, from the point you made when you wrote "it has all the trappings of an academic's effort to find a not hitherto appreciated profound insight, at the usual cost of lumbering us with all sorts of imaginary new entities" One of the important jobs of professional scholars is to analyze and critique the shortcomings of contemporary social institutions, but they are no more inclined nor better able than anyone else to critique their own. Institutional compromise is an old story - but the inclusion of the arts (literature, music, painting) within academic, science-oriented institutions is a recent story, and the consequences have yet to be comprehended. ____________________________________________________________ Senior Assisted Living Put your loved ones in good hands with quality senior assisted living. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=XSpqK_yfT9eYTWddSDB6tAAAJz6c l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASUQAAAAA=
