{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/1184",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 1184,
    "subject": "Lit Crit",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "1998-10-15T15:42:07+00:00",
    "last": "1998-10-15T15:42:07+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0020-0019@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Michael Straight",
        "address": "straight at email.unc.edu"
      },
      "date": "1998-10-15T15:42:07+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) Lit Crit",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "John Regehr wrote:\nHas the lit crit community come to any meaningful conclusions about what\nit means when the author offers an interpretation or an explanation\nabout a book?  Didn't Tolkien explicitly say that in TLotR an orc is\njust an orc, and don't some people still insist that the war of the ring\nis a metaphor for one of the world wars?  Although I wish Mr.  Wolfe\nnothing but the best of health in the future, it seems like things are\nmore tractable academically when an author is no longer able to offer\nnew interpretations, or to contradict existing ones."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I think the lit crit community says yes, no, yes, yes, no, yes, no, no,\nmaybe, fish, power.  \n\nI say listen to the author and other people's criticism if it interests\nyou and if it doesn't, ignore it.  In the introduction to one of his\nanthologies, Wolfe pretty much comes out and says what the story\n\"Westwind\" is about.  I think the story is better with the ambiguity\nunresolved, and therefore try to ignore what Wolfe had to say."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "I guess my position is that one's choice about whether to use external\nmaterials or not, or to spend a lot of time analyzing subtle points or\nnot, should be made in order to maximize one's enjoyment of the work. "
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I guess it depends on why you're reading.  If you're trying to learn\nphysics or virtue from an author, paying attention to external helps is\nprobably a good idea.  If you want to understand what an author is trying\nto say, what he writes about his work is probably of interest.  If you're\nreading for fun, I'd go with your criteria. \n\n-Rostrum"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}