A Confederacy of Dunces is a picaresque novel by American novelist John Kennedy Toole which appeared in 1980, eleven years after Toole's suicide. Published through the efforts of writer Walker Percy (who also contributed a foreword) and Toole's mother, the book became first a cult classic, then a mainstream success; it earned Toole a posthumous Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1981, and is now considered a canonical work of modern literature of the Southern United States.
The book's title refers to an epigraph from Jonathan Swift's essay, Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting: "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him" [From Wikipedia]
Now, I’m no genius, obviously, but I am rather well-read and have an IQ of 149.
When I post something to this blog, it is sometimes a throwaway, but even then the posting is supported by a life-time of serious reading and a considerable library of books, which I use for reference, rather than the internet, notwithstanding the Wikipedia insert above.
And I am writing this because I’m distressed by the lack of understanding and literate abilities of some readers here.
They don’t get allegorical references nor the underpinnings of material from those books and readings that I employ.
Their lack of academic acumen forces me to continually and redundantly state premises or conclusions in comments.
But it’s not just here where a confederacy of dunces is blatant. Almost every UFO venue is replete with dunces.
Yet, I expect commenters here to understand the basics of literature and culture. Some do:
Bruce Duensing, PurrlGurrl, Brownie, Lance, Paul Kimball, Nick Redfern, among them.
Then there are the dunces, persons who try to take my topics to a hinterland of unknowing, which they inhabit because they do not read the post accurately or misunderstand what it’s intellectually based upon.
Dialoguing with dunces is aggravating and a waste of time, but I try to stick with some of the visiting dunces here as they have become regulars and their ignorance is temperate compared to others elsewhere.
That said, let me implore readers here to look up references before they comment about a topic or note, from me and other smarties.
The flock of insulting and stupid takes on Paul Kimball’s outing of duplicitous stances by some UFO biggies, online recently, would have been tamped down if the persons attacking Mr. Kimball were versed in moral and ethical dogma, such as is enunciated in Adrian M.S. Piper’s two volumes of Hume and Kant’s clarification of what it is ethical to do, rationally, when confronted by errant behavior or moral misbehavior. [Rationality and the Structure of the Self. Volumes 1 and 2: The Humean Conception and The Kantian Conception]
And not to know what personal betrayal is when I quote Eric Blair (Orwell) in 1984 is truly upsetting, as the message is so very clear to those with a sensibility about mendacious acts by those who pretend to be our friends.
And to say that one understands Quantum Mechanics, when there is no evidence that they do, is intellectual dishonesty.
I’ve winnowed out, by not accepting comments or deleting same that come from truly nescient individuals, but will accept and allow (and have) louche commentary, just to make the commentary section here somewhat vibrant.
Other than that, stand down if you don’t get my meaning here or that of others who have a brain and their wits about them.
I hate casting pearls before swine.
RR
0 comments:
Post a Comment