As so often is the case, the most devastating criticism of Buell's book consists simply of quoting a passage:
Admittedly any such dyadic comparison risks oversimplifying the menu of eligible strategies, but the risk is lessened when one bears in mind that to envisage novels as potential GANs is necessarily to conceive them as belonging to more extensive domains of narrative practice that draw on repertoires of tropes and recipes for encapsulating nationness of the kinds sketched briefly in the Introduction—such that you can’t fully grasp what’s at stake in any one possible GAN without imagining the individual work in multiple conversations with many others, and not just U.S. literature either.Calling the Great American Novel a "GAN" should be enough to tip us off.
Arrrrrrrggggghhhhh!!!! I thought I'd escaped that when I fled, er, finished grad school.
ReplyDeleteLittleRed1
I don't see on Wikipedia that he published any novels himself, great or otherwise. The world is probably richer for that. ?Ecocriticism??
ReplyDeleteDo these people just use a random word generator or something?
ReplyDeleteAs so often is the case, the most devastating criticism of Buell's book consists simply of quoting a passage:
ReplyDeleteHard to disagree with that conclusion.