Subscribe: Comments on I N D I R E C T I O N S: Baswell, NCS, & Eccentric Bodies
http://ndalessio.blogspot.com/feeds/530737380377742201/comments/default
Preview: Comments on I N D I R E C T I O N S: Baswell, NCS, & Eccentric Bodies

Comments on I N D I R E C T I O N S: Baswell, NCS, & Eccentric Bodies





Updated: 2010-03-24T22:55:44.881-05:00

 



Thanks for the comment Karl. Of course, I don't w...

2008-08-08T11:40:00.000-05:00

Thanks for the comment Karl. Of course, I don't want to speak for Baswell, but I think you're right about needing additional categories. I, too, was long ago infected by scholasticism, so I can sympathize. In Baswell's defense, though, he may very well have made gestures toward such categories that I have missed in my notes.

Still, I would want to be cautious about such additional categories, for these could themselves contribute to abjecting modes of thought in our own scholarly practices. Moreover, the categories themselves wouldn't seem to me ever to be absolute (nor do I think you're suggesting they would). Here I'm thinking of how certain odd bodies can inspire both wonder *and* pity (e.g., the blind).



I like how 'eccentric' and 'odd' bodies can make o...

2008-08-08T08:50:00.000-05:00

I like how 'eccentric' and 'odd' bodies can make our otherwise stolid thoughts move, BUT, having been infected with scholasticism, I wonder if we need additional categories: to wit, we need, I think, to distinguish between odd bodies that inspire wonder or horror (Dame Ragnall or Cynocephali, for example) and those that inspire pity (the blind and lame who people hagiography, who (are meant to?) inspire pity).