ext_8749 ([identity profile] penwiper26.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] rj_anderson 2007-08-29 10:59 pm (UTC)

Yes. Wolverton strikes me as having perceived it as a distinction managment issue -- and that's the problem I have with canon formation(s) of the present. But even though I've said some of the exact same things, I loved my time in graduate school in English, and I appreciate what it taught me, though I learned it more or less in an oppositional way.

Also, what I don't think Wolverton quite appreciates is the fact that "political correctness" is not a specific morality. In America right now, "political correctness" is no longer what it was in the 90s; it's still used as a term of abuse for anything representable by the face of Hillary Clinton, but what's actually "correct" right now is a diffuse jingoism and a distaste for people who rock the authoritative boat. Wolverton would have done better to leave the terms "political agenda" and "political correctness" out of the discourse and say that those who hate "moralism" in literature actually hate either a) didacticism or b) moral stances that oppose their own. And, well, yeah. I hate reading stories whose moral stances oppose my own, whether lots of other people like them or not.

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org