 |
 |
>Yes, but still and at the same time, the allegory does NOT read itself. >And, yes, this is the nth time you've heard that. But it is true that the >allegory does nothing in and of itself. A reader has to activate it. Bill Godshalk > > >>This is very idle. If they do not meddle with the > > >>allegory, the allegory will not meddle with them." > > > > Not to wrangle, but according to my post-Hazlittian mentors, it does > > meddle. It gropes, it seizes, it obsesses, it ruins. I've been > > tangled in, strangled by, painted dragons. When a small boy; when an > > old man. It was both terrifying and yummy. > > > > > > > > >Belatedly -- the Dylan quote about being tangled in the allegory makes me > > >think of a favorite passage from Hazlitt's "Lectures on the English > > >Poets," when he's been commending to his readers the beauties of various > > >passages in The Faerie Queene (including the caves of Mammon and Despair, > > >the Gardens and the Bower, the Mask of Cupid and Arlo Hill): > > > > > >"But some people will say that all this may be very fine, but that they > > >cannot undertake it on account of the allegory. They are afraid of the > > >allegory, as if they thought it would bite them: they look at it as a > > >child looks at a painted dragon, and think it will strangle them in its > > >shining folds. This is very idle. If they do not meddle with the > > >allegory, the allegory will not meddle with them." > > > > > > > > > > > >Ken > > *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 ***************************************