 |
 |
It is interesting that nearly all the discussion about Literature has been from the direction of its mechanics. This is quite a modern idea isn't it? - leading to a definition of literature as something made, used and itself using. There is nothing in the discussions - which I've really enjoyed by the way - which treats Literature as something independent of these mechanics, nothing that treats it as being intrinsic or as possessing its own values. The discussions appear to take for granted Literature's contingency. I suppose I agree on one level with this mechanical approach but I do think there is a problem when it comes to the way the particular mechanical bodies mentioned - publishers, critics, syllabus makers etc - insert or re-establish or pronounce notions of intrinsic value back into the product in order to either sell it or use it as cultural capital. Need to think more about this. Tim A. </HTML>