Kermit Snelson wrote:
Intellectuals and artists have always relied on
patronage, patronage depends on plunder, and plunder depends on deceit
and exploitation. Who, after all, paid for Europe's cathedrals? Who
paid for Beethoven's sonatas? Who pays for universities today?
[...] which side
snip
It was just an exercise in comparing now and then, here and now. I don't
have a particular axe to grind. Since I write quite a lot, I think about
what makes heroes of some writers and how their achievement might be
grounded in their social practice. Strauusian enough for you, Kermit?
Keith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sat 10/04/03 at 04:32 PM -0400):
New Media Education and Its Discontent
there's something hilarious about the proposition that, were it not
for andrew jackson -- author, they say, of the quintessentially
all-american 'OK' ('oll korekt!') -- this country would be more
inclined
Brian, the point of yours to which I was replying was not opposition to
consensus, but rather the implication that to oppose one must have anonymity.
That is not to suggest that current society is reasonable, liberal,
democratic, desirable, un-opposable or necessarily irreplaceable.
Kermit makes
Kermit Snelson wrote:
But to be honest with ourselves, we must look deep into what
intellectualism means.
I know that intellectuals are killers, sometimes not just figuratively. I
am one myself, after all. But not all forms of thinking or persons that we
might deem to be intellectual are
Michael Goldhaber wrote (speaking of far left and right in the US):
...on either side, too readily donning this mantle of persecution
and using it as an excuse for anonymity or for covering up one's real
intent undermines any possibility of genuine democracy, and must lead
to a general and
