To say that everything is political, as Marxism correctly does, is not
at all to say that everything must always be discussed in primarily
political terms. It merely validates a theoretical exploration of the
framing of formal study. And to be alert to the chimerical and
political nature of nostalgia, as Spenser clearly is, is not to refrain
from practicing it productively.
Michael
Roger Kuin wrote:
> I have spent a number of happy years in the intellectual company of
> Barthes, Derrida, Ricoeur, Foucault et al., but I take exception to
> the (widespread, I know) concept that 'there is no such thing as
> apolitical literary criticism'. This is an idea that came out of
> Marxism, and was part of the philosophy that told us that if we
> *thought* we were enjoying, thinking about, and writing about
> literature apolitically, what that *really* meant was that we were
> either fools (dupes of bourgeois literalism) or knaves (bourgeois
> liberals). In other words, the Marxist decides what is political, and
> that turns out to be everything.
>
> Even in life we are allowed to be nostalgic at times, pastorally or
> otherwise, and in literature nostalgia is, thank God, not only a
> permitted but a richly productive emotion. I, for one, should be
> charmed to enact it, on or off this list, and hope that we may be
> permitted to continue shamelessly enjoying not only any reading of
> Sidney and Spenser that seems valid and pleasurable, but such
> chimerical poets as Matthew Arnold, Keats, Lionel Johnson and Dylan
> Thomas. And communicating our (ré-)jouissance.
>
> Roger Kuin
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10-Jun-08, at 4:24 PM, Michael Saenger wrote:
>
> I hate to buck the trend here, but I did my graduate work at the
> University of Toronto, which is known for its old-fashioned emphasis
> on traditional literary approaches, such as genre study. That
> training served me well, but it was usefully supplemented by the
> brilliant theoretical work of people like Foucault, Butler, etc.
> There is no such thing as apolitical literary criticism, and I see no
> empirical evidence that the often-voiced "decline of literacy" has
> any basis in fact. While it is true that there may be an overemphasis
> on political criticism in some circles, there are plenty of people
> out there who are still interested in aesthetics, and more
> importantly, there is a widespread engagment in the mixture of those
> ostensibly opposed points of view. I want to be careful that we do
> not, on this list, enact the kind of pastoral nostalgia which has
> always been recognized by poets to be chimerical.
>
> Michael
>
> David Lohnes wrote:
>
>> Steven Willett said:
>>
>> "I believe that we should first provide students with the (a)
>> historical background, (b) linguistic knowledge, (c) technical
>> versification and (d) genre conventions of what we teach. These are
>> subject to empirical verification and testing and ought to be the
>> bedrock of literary studies, not criticism. Beyond that we get into
>> hermeneutics."
>>
>> I completely agree, with the one caveat that I would put linguistic
>> knowledge before historical background. As English professionals, we
>> should be appalled by and committed to waging war against the
>> widespread illiteracy and aliteracy in our society. Such is clearly
>> the duty that all the world expects of us, and failing that
>> motivation, we can surely recognize that widespread, socially
>> acceptable illiteracy sounds the death-knell of our departments.
>>
>> Just how far we've fallen is apparent upon a little retrospection:
>>
>> Hudson Taylor (the famous Christian missionary to China) was the
>> sickly descendent of stone masons and reed makers. He was unable to
>> go to school until he was eleven, and he was able to stay only two
>> years before he had to go to work (mostly in his fathers reed shop,
>> but with a nine-month stint as a junior clerk at a bank).
>>
>> And yet here is a snippet from his correspondence with his sister
>> (about four years his junior and never went to school), written at
>> eighteen years old and in the month of November. Imagine this from a
>> first-semester freshman writing in the Fall:
>>
>> "In your last note you suggest that it might be a good plan to write
>> to the Chinese Association and ask whether they could send me out as
>> a married man. You must excuse my differing from you in opinion. I
>> think that to do so would be to effectually prevent them. They would
>> naturally conclude that I wanted to get married without means, and
>> that I hope they would insure me from the consequences of such
>> conduct. It would not do to write to them at all at present."
>>
>> Compare this to the written communication of the teenage sons and
>> daughters of the middle-class in our day, and the problem is
>> manifest. In a society where reading and writing (in the full sense
>> of the word, as exemplified above) are not widely used skills, real
>> literature can never be widely enjoyed or understood. If it isn't
>> widely enjoyed and understood, the majority of people will be less
>> and less eager to pay to have it taught to their children. Herein,
>> in my estimation, is the root of shrinking English departments.
>>
>> And we, the professionals, are (with the parents) chiefly to blame.
>>
>> There are certainly other contributing factors, including changes in
>> technology and the rise of the visual media. It's not an ideal
>> pedagogical situation by any stretch, and there's much that is out
>> of our control. But at the end of the day, there's only one group in
>> society both trained and strategically situated to stem the tide: Us.
>>
>> And yet what do we do?
>>
>> At my university, two semesters of English are required of students.
>> That's only two, but it's still two. Every year, three thousand new
>> students sit in our freshman English classes for two semesters while
>> we get to take one last shot at teaching them to read and write like
>> (and I mean this) *human* beings.
>> In one of those semesters (until recent changes) the goal was to
>> teach students to write a literary paper from each of several
>> critical perspectives, including New Critical, Reader-Response,
>> Deconstructionist, and Feminist.
>>
>> It's not about student intelligence or ability. It's about educator
>> goals.
>> If for no other reason than the continued existence of our
>> profession, we ought to throw the critical theory and film studies
>> out the pedagogical window (and go teach in secondary schools if we
>> have to) *until* we have a generation of students that once again
>> knows how to read and write as humans were meant to.
>>
>> (IMHO) :)
>>
>> Work Cited: Taylor, Frederick Howard. <i>Hudson Taylor in Early
>> Years: The Growth of a Soul.</i> Rpt 1998. Singapore: OMF
>> International (formerly China Inland Mission), 1911. The bio sketch
>> is derived from the first several chapters. The excerpt is taken
>> from page 98.
>>
>>
>>>>> Ian <[log in to unmask]> 06/10/08 7:19 AM >>>
>>>>>
>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> -----------------------
>> Sender: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List <SIDNEY-
>> [log in to unmask]>
>> Poster: Ian <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Re: A problem with pastoral
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------
>>
>> This is a multipart message in MIME format.
>>
>> ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C8CB3F.A8B324F0
>> Content-Type: text/plain;
>> charset="US-ASCII"
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>
>> Cheers for Professor Willett! I hope I am not misunderstanding his
>> position. I have returned to academic study after many years
>> teaching and
>> administering in a secondary school/college environment. Now after
>> two+
>> years studying within one of the premier universities in my country,
>> I am
>> staggered to read the same sort of piffle that Professor Willett
>> describes.
>> I thought I was some sort of fatuous idiot unable to understand what
>> so many
>> Ph D theses' abstracts were really saying. I had discounted in my
>> naivete
>> that students were being tailored to pursue areas of interest that
>> reflected
>> glory on a minority point of view. I am struggling to say
>> accurately and
>> fairly what it is I observe around me. Maybe I haven't been very
>> clear, and
>> maybe you can cut me a little slack. I will not class myself as an
>> academic
>> until I have at the least earned my Ph D.
>>
>>
>> But please, surely real scholarship is not the blind presentation of
>> personal prejudices, and moreover, surely real scholarship grows out
>> of the
>> sort of process Professor Willett describes. Further, it can be
>> demonstrated that simple language is an excellent conveyor of
>> complex ideas.
>> I hate to see language made deliberately complex in the belief that
>> such is
>> scholarship. I hear agreement to this point around me, but I actually
>> witness only lip service.
>>
>>
>> Off my soapbox, out of the real world, back to the world of the
>> theoretical!
>>
>>
>> Ian Lipke
>>
>> UQ, Australia
>>
>>
>> From: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List [mailto:SIDNEY-
>> [log in to unmask]]
>> On Behalf Of Steven J. Willett
>> Sent: Monday, 9 June 2008 10:56 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: A problem with pastoral
>>
>>
>>
>> One of the issues we have debated with considerable heat over the past
>> fifteen years is the tendency of many academics, at least in the
>> post-1800
>> literatures, to teach more like politicians, Marxists, sexual
>> revolutionaries or sociologists than professors of literature. The
>> tendency
>> is particularly acute in black and feminist studies departments, but
>> the
>> habit of proselytizing students is not confined to them or the
>> literature of
>> the past 200 years.
>> <snip>
>>
>> I am not anti-theory and most particularly not opposed to feminist
>> studies
>> and black studies departments if their programs are conducted at the
>> highest
>> levels of disinterested scholarship. But I've seen too many classes
>> where
>> the professor has set out to tell the students what is moral and
>> what is
>> immoral, what is racist and what is not, what is sexist and what is
>> not, and
>> grading accordingly.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>> Is this a middle way? I would say not and probably Charlie would
>> say not.
>> It is at most a one-fourth way. It has been my experience,
>> especially with
>> NASSR and MLA conferences that academics prefer by a huge majority to
>> indulge their own ethical hobby horses. Here is a link to this year's
>> Toronto NASSR conference where we will hear papers like "Queering
>> Man-Midwifery," "'Endless Dreams of Sickliness': Embodied Disease and
>> Revolution in Wordworth's Prelude," "Sympathy and the 'Mist of
>> Nothing' of
>> Romanticism," "That 'strange and awful hour / of vast concussion':
>> Reading
>> Time in Beachy Head," "Domesticated Discourse of Sexualtiy in
>> Darwin's Loves
>> of Plants and its Imitators," "Technoromanticism Reanimated: A 'Grave'
>> Approach," "'A goddess of four years standing! incredible!': The
>> Dazzling
>> Collectibility of the Venus de Medici," "'Things violently destroyed or
>> silently gone out of mind': Slow Death and Naturalist Time-Keeping"
>> and many
>> another finely-wrought vase:
>>
>> http://www.utoronto.ca/english/NASSR/program.html
>>
>>
>> No wonder ordinary readers want nothing to do with criticism. Without
>> graduate training, most of it's impenetrable to even well-read
>> minds. And I
>> can assure Charlie that the conference will be awash with predigested
>> ethical claims, especially about the high accomplishment of say
>> Charlotte
>> Smith, the equal of Wordsworth. Even I will be there in a panel on
>> prosody,
>> where I will take the audience through the stages by which Wordsworth
>> created the most complex stanza form in the English language,
>> explain why he
>> structured it as he did and show how it functions in perhaps his
>> last great
>> masterpiece, "On the Power of Sound." But we few on the
>> versification panel
>> are clearly in the backward and abysm of literary studies.
>>
>>
>> Steven J. Willett
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> US phone/fax: (503) 390-1070
>>
>> Japan phone: (053) 475-4714
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.0.0/1490 - Release Date:
>> 6/8/2008
>> 5:32 PM
>>
>>
>> ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C8CB3F.A8B324F0
>> Content-Type: text/html;
>> charset="US-ASCII"
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>
>> <html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =
>> xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
>> xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
>> xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" =
>> xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
>>
>> <head>
>> <meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>> charset=3Dus-ascii">
>> <meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
>> <style>
>> <!--
>> /* Font Definitions */
>> @font-face
>> {font-family:Helvetica;
>> panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
>> @font-face
>> {font-family:Helvetica;
>> panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
>> @font-face
>> {font-family:Calibri;
>> panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
>> @font-face
>> {font-family:Tahoma;
>> panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
>> @font-face
>> {font-family:"\0027Helvetica CY\0027";
>> panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
>> /* Style Definitions */
>> p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
>> {margin:0cm;
>> margin-bottom:.0001pt;
>> font-size:12.0pt;
>> font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
>> a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
>> {mso-style-priority:99;
>> color:blue;
>> text-decoration:underline;}
>> a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
>> {mso-style-priority:99;
>> color:purple;
>> text-decoration:underline;}
>> p
>> {mso-style-priority:99;
>> mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
>> margin-right:0cm;
>> mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
>> margin-left:0cm;
>> font-size:12.0pt;
>> font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
>> span.apple-converted-space
>> {mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
>> span.apple-style-span
>> {mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
>> span.EmailStyle20
>> {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
>> font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D;}
>> .MsoChpDefault
>> {mso-style-type:export-only;
>> font-size:10.0pt;}
>> @page Section1
>> {size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
>> margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
>> div.Section1
>> {page:Section1;}
>> -->
>> </style>
>> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
>> <o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" />
>> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
>> <o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit">
>> <o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" />
>> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
>> </head>
>>
>> <body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple style=3D'word-wrap: =
>> break-word;
>> -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;-webkit-line-break: after-white-space'>
>>
>> <div class=3DSection1>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'>Cheers for Professor Willett! I hope I am not
>> misunderstanding his position. I have returned to academic =
>> study
>> after many years teaching and administering in a secondary =
>> school/college
>> environment. Now after two+ years studying within one of the =
>> premier
>> universities in my country, I am staggered to read the same sort of =
>> piffle that
>> Professor Willett describes. I thought I was some sort of fatuous =
>> idiot
>> unable to understand what so many Ph D theses’ abstracts were =
>> really
>> saying. I had discounted in my naivete that students were being =
>> tailored
>> to pursue areas of interest that reflected glory on a minority point
>> of =
>> view. I am struggling to say accurately and fairly what it is I
>> observe around =
>> me. Maybe
>> I haven’t been very clear, and maybe you can cut me a little =
>> slack. I
>> will not class myself as an academic until I have at the least
>> earned my =
>> Ph D.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'> But please, surely real scholarship is not the =
>> blind presentation
>> of personal prejudices, and moreover, surely real scholarship grows
>> out =
>> of the
>> sort of process Professor Willett describes. Further, it can be
>> demonstrated that simple language is an excellent conveyor of complex =
>> ideas. I hate to see language made deliberately complex in the
>> belief that such =
>> is
>> scholarship. I hear agreement to this point around me, but I =
>> actually
>> witness only lip service.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'>Off my soapbox, out of the real world, back to the
>> world =
>> of the
>> theoretical!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'>Ian Lipke<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'>UQ, Australia<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <div style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:
>> 3.0pt =
>> 0cm 0cm 0cm'>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</
>> span>=
>> </b><span
>> style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> =
>> Sidney-Spenser
>> Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] <b>On Behalf
>> Of =
>> </b>Steven
>> J. Willett<br>
>> <b>Sent:</b> Monday, 9 June 2008 10:56 PM<br>
>> <b>To:</b> [log in to unmask]<br>
>> <b>Subject:</b> Re: A problem with pastoral<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal>One of the issues we have debated with
>> considerable =
>> heat
>> over the past fifteen years is the tendency of many academics, at
>> least =
>> in the
>> post-1800 literatures, to teach more like politicians, Marxists, sexual
>> revolutionaries or sociologists than professors of literature. The
>> tendency is particularly acute in black and feminist studies =
>> departments, but
>> the habit of proselytizing students is not confined to them or the =
>> literature
>> of the past 200 years. <span =
>> style=3D'color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'><snip><o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal> I am not anti-theory and most particularly =
>> not opposed
>> to feminist studies and black studies departments if their programs are
>> conducted at the highest levels of disinterested scholarship. But =
>> I've
>> seen too many classes where the professor has set out to tell the =
>> students what
>> is moral and what is immoral, what is racist and what is not, what is =
>> sexist
>> and what is not, and grading accordingly. <o:p></o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'color:#1F497D'><snip><o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
>> color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal>Is this a middle way? I would say not and =
>> probably
>> Charlie would say not. It is at most a one-fourth way. It =
>> has been
>> my experience, especially with NASSR and MLA conferences that
>> academics =
>> prefer
>> by a huge majority to indulge their own ethical hobby horses. Here =
>> is a
>> link to this year's Toronto NASSR conference where we will hear
>> papers =
>> like
>> "Queering Man-Midwifery," "'Endless Dreams of =
>> Sickliness':
>> Embodied Disease and Revolution in Wordworth's Prelude," =
>> "Sympathy
>> and the 'Mist of Nothing' of Romanticism," "That 'strange and =
>> awful
>> hour / of vast concussion': Reading Time in Beachy Head," =
>> "Domesticated
>> Discourse of Sexualtiy in Darwin's Loves of Plants and its =
>> Imitators,"
>> "Technoromanticism Reanimated: A 'Grave'
>> Approach," “‘A goddess of four years standing!
>> incredible!’: The Dazzling Collectibility of the Venus de =
>> Medici,” “‘Things
>> violently destroyed or silently gone out of mind’: Slow Death and
>> Naturalist Time-Keeping” and many another finely-wrought =
>> vase: <o:p></o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><a =
>> href=3D"http://www.utoronto.ca/english/NASSR/program.html">http://
>> www.uto=
>> ronto.ca/english/NASSR/program.html</a><o:p></o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span class=3Dapple-style-span><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>No
>> wonder ordinary readers want nothing to do with criticism. Without
>> graduate training, most of it's impenetrable to even well-read minds. =
>> And
>> I can assure Charlie that the conference will be awash with
>> predigested =
>> ethical
>> claims, especially about the high accomplishment of say Charlotte
>> Smith, =
>> the
>> equal of Wordsworth. Even I will be there in a panel on prosody, =
>> where I
>> will take the audience through the stages by which Wordsworth created =
>> the most
>> complex stanza form in the English language, explain why he
>> structured =
>> it as he
>> did and show how it functions in perhaps his last great masterpiece, =
>> "On
>> the Power of Sound." But we few on the versification panel =
>> are
>> clearly in the backward and abysm of literary studies. =
>> </span></span><span
>> class=3Dapple-style-span><span style=3D'font-family:"'Helvetica =
>> CY'","serif"'> </span></span><span
>> class=3Dapple-style-span><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'> </span></
>> span><o:p></o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";
>> color:black'>Steven J. Willett<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";
>> color:black'><a =
>> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</
>> a><o:p=
>>
>>> </o:p></span></p>
>>>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";
>> color:black'><a =
>> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</
>> a><o:p=
>>
>>> </o:p></span></p>
>>>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";
>> color:black'>US phone/fax: (503) 390-1070<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";
>> color:black'>Japan phone: (053) 475-4714<o:p></o:p></span></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";
>> color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><span =
>> style=3D'font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";
>> color:black'><br>
>> <br>
>> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> <p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
>>
>> <p><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-
>> serif"'>No =
>> virus
>> found in this incoming message.<br>
>> Checked by AVG.<br>
>> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.0.0/1490 - Release Date:
>> 6/8/2008 =
>> 5:32
>> PM</span><o:p></o:p></p>
>>
>> </div>
>>
>> </body>
>>
>> </html>
>>
>> ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C8CB3F.A8B324F0--
>>
>
--
Michael Saenger, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of English
PO Box 770
Southwestern University
Georgetown, TX 78627
Office Hours: Monday, 2pm to 3 pm; Thursday 11 am to 12 noon, and by appointment
Phone: 512-863-1787 Fax: 512-863-1535
|