(no subject)
Oct. 3rd, 2006 03:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
labellementeuseSo, y'all, I'm writing an essay on science, economics, and British Imperialism in The Hunting of the Snark. You would think, wouldn't you, that an essay entitled "Science, Literature and the Hunting of the Snark" which lists the poem as one of its subjects would be vaguely relevant to this, wouldn't you?
Yeah, you'd be WRONG. It was written in 1942 and it's all about the quest for scientific certainty in the past "generation and a half", ie, the twentieth century. ARGOMFGRELEVANCEPLZ.
Also? When you have a book that's highly recommended reading for an essay, that's on three day loan, for an essay due tomorrow, and it was due back YESTERDAY, and OTHER PEOPLE ie ME have it reserved? RETURN THE FUCKING BOOK ALREADY GODDAMN IT.
... or there will be when I stop tearing my hair out and start reading actually useful sources. I think I'm probably going to end up citing, like, one book and one article BUT THAT'LL JUST HAVE TO BE ENOUGH, I guess. (It's okay, we weren't even required to do any outside reading for the paper, so.)
I would so much rather be doing Tess, but I missed most of the classes on that, so I'm just suffering. SIGH. Also, it's pouring.
Also! Carroll scholars are stoned. I can't believe they're calling this an academic essay, it's basically a stream of consciousness on Alice and Carroll and nonsense literature. Do you think this means I get to do the same thing? I could write a great stream of consciousness on this topic.
Also also! Wow, I just read a totally useless article that spent 20 pages on Alice Through the Looking-Glass and half a page on The Hunting of the Snark. WHY is there no scholarship on the damn poem? I know he wrote (repeatedly) that it was "all nonsense" and insisted that he didn't mean anything by it when he wrote it, but he also acknowledged that things come to mean something even when they didn't have meaning when they were first written; and, too, he wrote that sometimes you mean things even when you don't intend to. Bah, humbug. Alice isn't the be-all and end-all, you know?
Yeah, you'd be WRONG. It was written in 1942 and it's all about the quest for scientific certainty in the past "generation and a half", ie, the twentieth century. ARGOMFGRELEVANCEPLZ.
Also? When you have a book that's highly recommended reading for an essay, that's on three day loan, for an essay due tomorrow, and it was due back YESTERDAY, and OTHER PEOPLE ie ME have it reserved? RETURN THE FUCKING BOOK ALREADY GODDAMN IT.
... or there will be when I stop tearing my hair out and start reading actually useful sources. I think I'm probably going to end up citing, like, one book and one article BUT THAT'LL JUST HAVE TO BE ENOUGH, I guess. (It's okay, we weren't even required to do any outside reading for the paper, so.)
I would so much rather be doing Tess, but I missed most of the classes on that, so I'm just suffering. SIGH. Also, it's pouring.
Also! Carroll scholars are stoned. I can't believe they're calling this an academic essay, it's basically a stream of consciousness on Alice and Carroll and nonsense literature. Do you think this means I get to do the same thing? I could write a great stream of consciousness on this topic.
Also also! Wow, I just read a totally useless article that spent 20 pages on Alice Through the Looking-Glass and half a page on The Hunting of the Snark. WHY is there no scholarship on the damn poem? I know he wrote (repeatedly) that it was "all nonsense" and insisted that he didn't mean anything by it when he wrote it, but he also acknowledged that things come to mean something even when they didn't have meaning when they were first written; and, too, he wrote that sometimes you mean things even when you don't intend to. Bah, humbug. Alice isn't the be-all and end-all, you know?
