Dear Professor Hamilton,
I certainly agree about the value of Spenser scholarship and have always
admired your own invaluable contributions to this scholarship.
I confess to being troubled by the epistemological assertions underlying
your post, even if they were made in jest, and their larger philosophical
implications. Are you implying we cannot know much about Spenser other than
what is semantically or empirically verifiable, and that therefore anything
else, such as interpretations of line 108 from the "Teares of the Muses,"
is a baseless fabric, valuable only insofar as it enables people publish
articles and editions,build careers and reputations, and in the process,
keep interest in Spenser alive?
I would truly appreciate an answer to this question, as it seems to me
germane to a timely reflection on what it is we literary scholars are about.
Sincerely,
Dr. Shirley Sharon-Zisser
Tel Aviv University
At 04:41 11/11/00 -0500, you wrote:
We don't know, we can't know,we weren't intended to know, and so why
bother? One answer: an article or note giving some other identification
contributes to the valuable Spenser industry. A.C. Hamilton
>
>
>>A.C.Hamilton
>[log in to unmask]
>Cappon Professor Emeritus
>Queen's University, Canada
>Phone & Fax: 613- 544-6759
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|