Jesse Nicol reflects that:
"...the faith of Christ or Mahomet, the philosophy of Locke or Jefferson, the science of Newton or Darwin, or certain verses -" (p. 84)
- troubled the peace of the world and asks whether new ways from an obscure culture might do the same in his period? His period needs to be shaken up. However, I am confident that we can build a dynamic culture that welcomes newness instead of being troubled by it.
Anderson repeats his idiosyncratic use of the word "glade":
"The sun, become a red-gold shield, was on the horizon. Glade blazed from it across the waters." (ibid.)
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
I am not so confident a dynamic culture can even BE like that unless it was first troubled by things that shook it out of old ruts. The dynamicism of real world vigorous cultures came from grappling to assimilate new ideas, beliefs, technologies, etc. Or from defending itself from outside aggression, as Christendom did when it opposed Muslim attempts at conquest.
And this idiosyncratic use of "glade" by Anderson has baffled me ever since you first comment on it. It simply does not MEAN what Anderson intends it to mean when he uses it. I don't understand how "glade" could so drastically change its meaning from "open space within a wooded area" to the sense Anderson gives it.
Sean
Post a Comment