<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Episode 46: Institutionalized</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/</link>
	<description>Overthinking It subjects the popular culture to a level of scrutiny it probably doesn&#039;t deserve.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 06:16:06 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gab</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/#comment-9191</link>
		<dc:creator>Gab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 13:54:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=7650#comment-9191</guid>
		<description>Milton: Oh, I read that book in a class about European imperialism, so it isn&#039;t like I don&#039;t get it and what it represents.  I just personally found it poorly written and couldn&#039;t give it the general label of &quot;good&quot; because of that.  There are other examples of political literature I felt were genuinely good, in every sense, when I was reading them, and they&#039;re plenty old; _Heart of Darkness_ just didn&#039;t do it for me.   I know I&#039;m an oddball for this, though, so _Heart of Darkness_ isn&#039;t really the kind of book I&#039;m talking about.  The themes and tropes in that one are blatantly obvious with regards to why they make it important- the evils of imperialism, the barbarism &quot;civilized&quot; peoples will resort to in the name of &quot;rescuing&quot; the &quot;barbarians&quot; they encounter, etc.  I&#039;m talking about books nobody ever really says are &quot;good&quot; but that still get pounded into the heads of students every year, be it in high school, college, whatever.  Mlwaski&#039;s example is perfect: I&#039;ve never heard a SINGLE person say Ayn Rand books are GOOD, but time and again I&#039;ll hear about how &quot;important&quot; they are, and everybody and their goldfish needs to read them, etc.  (I&#039;ve made it a personal life goal NOT to read them, though, because of the horror stories I&#039;ve come across, haha.) And what you get at in the last two sentences bolsters another question I sort of hinted at, too: The relevance of literature changes sometimes, but who makes that call, and how and why do they do it?

(Oh, and yes, I do enjoy _Apocalypse Now_ very much.  It&#039;s disturbing, but, well, GOOD.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Milton: Oh, I read that book in a class about European imperialism, so it isn&#8217;t like I don&#8217;t get it and what it represents.  I just personally found it poorly written and couldn&#8217;t give it the general label of &#8220;good&#8221; because of that.  There are other examples of political literature I felt were genuinely good, in every sense, when I was reading them, and they&#8217;re plenty old; _Heart of Darkness_ just didn&#8217;t do it for me.   I know I&#8217;m an oddball for this, though, so _Heart of Darkness_ isn&#8217;t really the kind of book I&#8217;m talking about.  The themes and tropes in that one are blatantly obvious with regards to why they make it important- the evils of imperialism, the barbarism &#8220;civilized&#8221; peoples will resort to in the name of &#8220;rescuing&#8221; the &#8220;barbarians&#8221; they encounter, etc.  I&#8217;m talking about books nobody ever really says are &#8220;good&#8221; but that still get pounded into the heads of students every year, be it in high school, college, whatever.  Mlwaski&#8217;s example is perfect: I&#8217;ve never heard a SINGLE person say Ayn Rand books are GOOD, but time and again I&#8217;ll hear about how &#8220;important&#8221; they are, and everybody and their goldfish needs to read them, etc.  (I&#8217;ve made it a personal life goal NOT to read them, though, because of the horror stories I&#8217;ve come across, haha.) And what you get at in the last two sentences bolsters another question I sort of hinted at, too: The relevance of literature changes sometimes, but who makes that call, and how and why do they do it?</p>
<p>(Oh, and yes, I do enjoy _Apocalypse Now_ very much.  It&#8217;s disturbing, but, well, GOOD.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Milton</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/#comment-9189</link>
		<dc:creator>Milton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 07:20:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=7650#comment-9189</guid>
		<description>@Gab.... How are we to judge the quality of Literature as in the case of _Heart of Darkness_ in our current society? What relevance do we see in a dark piece about the ideology of imperialism. I know that Francis Ford Coppola was able to adapt it into the movie _Apocalypse Now_. But does the current generation now see even this movie as dated.... not relevant? What political Literature will endure time?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Gab&#8230;. How are we to judge the quality of Literature as in the case of _Heart of Darkness_ in our current society? What relevance do we see in a dark piece about the ideology of imperialism. I know that Francis Ford Coppola was able to adapt it into the movie _Apocalypse Now_. But does the current generation now see even this movie as dated&#8230;. not relevant? What political Literature will endure time?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gab</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/#comment-9186</link>
		<dc:creator>Gab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 05:31:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=7650#comment-9186</guid>
		<description>See, I agree with a lot of those examples in their being bad AND important, but if they&#039;re bad, then WHY ARE THEY IMPORTANT?!  If it sucks, why does it still matter?  I asked that in high school, in college, and never really got an answer that didn&#039;t boil down to something like, &quot;Because academia says so.&quot;  I know crappy stuff gets analyzed all the time when it&#039;s current, but it then gets forgotten soon enough; yet we&#039;re still analyzing so many bad pieces of literature today, ones that get shrugs of defeat from teachers and professors when criticized for quality by students.  And isn&#039;t it the case that sometimes the stuff we&#039;re told is &quot;important&quot; NOW was totally irrelevant THEN?  (I know _The Great Gatsby_ wasn&#039;t a success in its first go-around, for example, but that one, at least, isn&#039;t crap.)  

I think I&#039;m just getting rhetorical, and I apologize.  But maybe one of the English majors could help me out here.  I didn&#039;t take much literature AS LITERATURE courses in college (it was almost always used as a lens of analysis for some other topic), so I hope you got better answers than I did.  I can guess why we study GOOD literature, but bad?  It hurts my soul and brain at the same time. 

Oh, and for some reason I was thinking _Heart of Darkness_ when I heard _Paradise Lost_ earlier.  Uh, I&#039;m not sure why.  _Paradise Lost_ is one of those books on the syllabi for a bunch of classes I ALMOST but never actually took, so I haven&#039;t read it.  Yeah, I know, I know.  I should, I should.  Mea culpa.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See, I agree with a lot of those examples in their being bad AND important, but if they&#8217;re bad, then WHY ARE THEY IMPORTANT?!  If it sucks, why does it still matter?  I asked that in high school, in college, and never really got an answer that didn&#8217;t boil down to something like, &#8220;Because academia says so.&#8221;  I know crappy stuff gets analyzed all the time when it&#8217;s current, but it then gets forgotten soon enough; yet we&#8217;re still analyzing so many bad pieces of literature today, ones that get shrugs of defeat from teachers and professors when criticized for quality by students.  And isn&#8217;t it the case that sometimes the stuff we&#8217;re told is &#8220;important&#8221; NOW was totally irrelevant THEN?  (I know _The Great Gatsby_ wasn&#8217;t a success in its first go-around, for example, but that one, at least, isn&#8217;t crap.)  </p>
<p>I think I&#8217;m just getting rhetorical, and I apologize.  But maybe one of the English majors could help me out here.  I didn&#8217;t take much literature AS LITERATURE courses in college (it was almost always used as a lens of analysis for some other topic), so I hope you got better answers than I did.  I can guess why we study GOOD literature, but bad?  It hurts my soul and brain at the same time. </p>
<p>Oh, and for some reason I was thinking _Heart of Darkness_ when I heard _Paradise Lost_ earlier.  Uh, I&#8217;m not sure why.  _Paradise Lost_ is one of those books on the syllabi for a bunch of classes I ALMOST but never actually took, so I haven&#8217;t read it.  Yeah, I know, I know.  I should, I should.  Mea culpa.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Milton</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/#comment-9185</link>
		<dc:creator>Milton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 05:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=7650#comment-9185</guid>
		<description>@Gab..... Paradise Lost? Into a limbo large and broad, since called The Paradise of Fools, to few unknown.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Gab&#8230;.. Paradise Lost? Into a limbo large and broad, since called The Paradise of Fools, to few unknown.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Wrather</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/#comment-9183</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Wrather</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 04:38:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=7650#comment-9183</guid>
		<description>Edgar Allan Poe. Hundreds of lines of The Canterbury Tales. Pericles, Prince of Tyre. The Marquis de Sade.

Absolutely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Edgar Allan Poe. Hundreds of lines of The Canterbury Tales. Pericles, Prince of Tyre. The Marquis de Sade.</p>
<p>Absolutely.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mlawski</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/#comment-9178</link>
		<dc:creator>mlawski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 22:11:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=7650#comment-9178</guid>
		<description>@Gab: &quot;can something (book, movie, song, game…) be bad but still be important&quot;?

Atlas Shrugged.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Gab: &#8220;can something (book, movie, song, game…) be bad but still be important&#8221;?</p>
<p>Atlas Shrugged.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gab</title>
		<link>http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/05/18/episode-46-institutionalized/#comment-9170</link>
		<dc:creator>Gab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 14:18:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthinkingit.com/?p=7650#comment-9170</guid>
		<description>Toni Morrison?  I didn&#039;t like her writing all that much.  I understand why she&#039;s &quot;important&quot; or whatever, but...  And I didn&#039;t like _Paradise Lost_ all that much, either.  But I guess that leads to something to overthink at a different time: can something (book, movie, song, game...) be bad but still be important, and what makes it &quot;important&quot; in the first place?

Fenzel: Don&#039;t people who say, &quot;That&#039;s bullsh*t,&quot; or something close usually then take flack from their peers, though?  Look at Bill-O.  If you ignore the sheep following him, the intellectuals and talking heads at best ignore him.  And saying something like that usually has the opposite result during a debate: the person being called &quot;wrong&quot; becomes even more steadfast in whatever position they have.  Sorry, I just thought you were wrong and had to call you on it.   Now I hope I have changed your mind.  ;)

Re: The social aspect of college- I think it&#039;s okay to want to relive your college days, but only to a certain extent.  It can get unhealthy, to the point where a person just can&#039;t move on and loses direction and motivation.  Having met (and lived with) people like that, I could elaborate more if I&#039;m not being clear enough, but for now I&#039;ll just say there&#039;s a difference between an alum that attends events open to the public that ANYONE can go to or that shows up on alum-ni weekend versus one that goes into the dining halls and asks (or even expects) students to get them food or that joins a club the fall after they graduated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Toni Morrison?  I didn&#8217;t like her writing all that much.  I understand why she&#8217;s &#8220;important&#8221; or whatever, but&#8230;  And I didn&#8217;t like _Paradise Lost_ all that much, either.  But I guess that leads to something to overthink at a different time: can something (book, movie, song, game&#8230;) be bad but still be important, and what makes it &#8220;important&#8221; in the first place?</p>
<p>Fenzel: Don&#8217;t people who say, &#8220;That&#8217;s bullsh*t,&#8221; or something close usually then take flack from their peers, though?  Look at Bill-O.  If you ignore the sheep following him, the intellectuals and talking heads at best ignore him.  And saying something like that usually has the opposite result during a debate: the person being called &#8220;wrong&#8221; becomes even more steadfast in whatever position they have.  Sorry, I just thought you were wrong and had to call you on it.   Now I hope I have changed your mind.  ;)</p>
<p>Re: The social aspect of college- I think it&#8217;s okay to want to relive your college days, but only to a certain extent.  It can get unhealthy, to the point where a person just can&#8217;t move on and loses direction and motivation.  Having met (and lived with) people like that, I could elaborate more if I&#8217;m not being clear enough, but for now I&#8217;ll just say there&#8217;s a difference between an alum that attends events open to the public that ANYONE can go to or that shows up on alum-ni weekend versus one that goes into the dining halls and asks (or even expects) students to get them food or that joins a club the fall after they graduated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
