[ilds] [Fwd: Re: authentic]

[slighcl]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [ilds] authentic
Date: 	Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:51:29 -0500
From: 	slighcl <slighcl at wfu.edu>
To: 	Bill Godshalk <godshawl at EMAIL.UC.EDU>
References: 	<C376C04B.5A58%ilyas.khan at crosby.com> 
<4750ACF1.8060904 at gmail.com> <1196475150.4750c30e1b626 at squirrel.wfu.edu> 
<1196476190.4750c71eadde9 at squirrel.wfu.edu> 
<A8.20.06930.B6FA1574 at gwout1> <47521CC8.6050408 at wfu.edu> 
<09.4F.27167.C3603574 at gwout2>



On 12/2/2007 2:23 PM, william godshalk wrote:
> definition 4: "Original, first-hand, prototypical; as opposed to 
> /copied/."
Definition #4 from the Oxford English Dictionary seems most problematic 
in terms of the /Quartet/.

We have been talking about "authenticity" in the aftermath of the 
al-Ahram piece, contrasting modernist ironies and postmodernist 
plurality against the narrowing gauge of Anis's post colonial reading. 

But there are other ways to approach the topic.  I wonder if Durrell's 
use of Gnosticism in /Justine /and the /Quartet /also connects to the 
problem of authenticity?  After all, "authenticity," "truth," and the 
difficulties in approaching those states are the most critical concerns 
of Gnostic practice.

C&c.

-- 
**********************
Charles L. Sligh
Department of English
Wake Forest University
slighcl at wfu.edu
**********************


-- 
**********************
Charles L. Sligh
Department of English
Wake Forest University
slighcl at wfu.edu
**********************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20071202/283ef3f1/attachment.html