[W T Clark]

Originally Posted by Yves S L

On Auden's intellectuality, how much more work would one typically have to do than that involved in learning all the intricacies of the Lamer vs Drake rap beef (yes, I am deliberately choosing an example which would not normally be considered "intellectual" with different cultural backgrounds having different prestige among different populations relative to different interests and group affiliations). Some hip hop fans go deep into the lore to uncover the meaning of every line of lyric, going back decades into hip-hop folklore, even going back to the beginnings of the slave trade in Atlanta and whatnot. The likes of Auden and Eliot are just enfolding meanings relative to their own academic backgrounds, and it is less intellectuality than familiarity with the suitable cultural background: it is the life of men who devoted themselves to a particular bookish culture.

I, myself, am not particularity impressed that some folk have a vague memory of the contents of many books (which is typically the definition of what folk consider being educated consists of), or are able to recite other people's concepts (as what is involved in passing school exams at every level). I think intellect has more to it than memorisation of a cultural background, which is mostly a matter of [1] accepting that cultural background to be something worth one's time and energy to spend learning it, and [2] immersion, and [3] have some ability to memorise (which is highly variable to [1] because levels of interests influence memory), whether you are talking about knowing the ins and out of "The Wasteland" or a beef between two rappers.

Indeed: I like that. That is why I am not discouraged by references as some say: calling poems "difficult". It is the sensation: not facts, that convinces me or does not convince me of a poem. "Accessibility" and "difficulty" seem to me empty holes.