Re: Rigidity and Formulae/pomo discourse

[Dennis Paoli <dpaoli@shiva.hunter.cuny.edu>]

Interesting posting.  I have long thought this myself, that many a novice 
writer's error was eerily similar to the neologisms, hyper-extended 
forms, or self-aware (self-conscious?) re-contextualizing of pomo 
critix.  In a p-modern text, they're fun; in a FYC essay, they're 
frustrating.  But could it be that they arise from the same desire, the 
same necessity: to express some new idea or new take on an idea just 
beyond the available language skills, and available language, of the writer?
They listen into a void, and hear language that has never been heard 
before, whether they're aware of the associations or not.

Dennis Paoli
Hunter College

On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Lynnell Edwards wrote:
> I have to add the student who wrote a poem about the "ball of Plato" she made things out of as a child (Play Dough).
> Actually, "ball of Plato" makes sense too, and interestingly these skewed 
  homonyms and "errant" (I'm thinking of Mark Taylor here) spellings are 
  exactly what we value when they are intentionally created in postmodern 
  discourse.  For any of you who have ever participated on the Pre/Text 
  lyst, you know this is exactly the case. > 
> Lynnell Edwards
> Concordia University, Portland, OR
> 
>