Although in a humorous and perhaps satirical way, can Euphelia's problems from this issue of The Rambler demonstrate this transition that Spacks discusses in Boredom?
"Thus I am condemned to solitude; the day moves slowly forward, and I see the dawn with uneasiness, because I consider that night is at a great distance. I have tried to sleep by a brook, but find its murmurs ineffectual; so that I am forced to be awake at least twelve hours, without visits, without cards, without laughter, and without flattery. I walk because I am disgusted with sitting still, and sit down because I am weary with walking...I am thus weary of myself that the current of youth stagnates, and that I am languishing in a dead calm, for want of some external impulse" (The Rambler No. 42).
"Early discourse about methods of occupying time suggests that the problem of leisure not only provides alternative ways of talking about boredom, it constitutes one of the causes for the new concern with boredom itself as a problem. By the nineteenth century, however, the notion that satiety, weariness, disgust, chagrin, ennui-inability to enjoy leisure-reflect internal inadequacy appears to yield largely to belief that such unpleasant states will dissolve given adequate eternal stimulation" (Spacks 18).
By looking at these two passages, one can see some great similarities between the two. For instance, there is the use of "disgust" associated with the "inability to enjoy leisure" found in both, and both refer to weariness, as Euphelia is in fact "languishing in a dead calm." Also, boredom is shown as a problem in both quotes. The poor girl who writes this letter in The Rambler is talking as if she is a prisoner, in a way "condemned" too this boredom. She does not talk of it as if there is something she can do about it. Finally, Euphelia attributes all her suffering to the "want of some external impulse," which are shown as a remedy for this "unpleasant state" in Spacks. What is truly interesting is that Euphelia is talking about this boredom in the way that Spacks argues to occur more in the nineteenth century. This issue of The Rambler is from 1750, and therefore the ideas are 50 years before their designated time period.
Perhaps the reader can take this as blatant evidence of the transition period between thinking of boredom as evidence of "internal inadequacy" and as the lack of "external stimulation." Euphelia is showing one of the two combating ideas that were most likely bouncing around at during the eighteenth century. The humorous nature of the letter seems to suggest that the issue of no "external impulses" to be found is one that is being satirized. Either way, it proves that this kind of thinking, whether looked down upon or not, was around at this time. The reader can see what Spacks is describing in her work occurring right before his or her very own eyes.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Monday, October 21, 2013
Literature and Mind Post 8: Tristram Shandy and "the Eye of the Mind"
Is Mr. Shandy in this passage from Tristram Shandy suggesting that not only is the information that has been stored in one's memory made up of visual images, but also ideas in general?
"For if you will turn your eyes inwards upon your mind...and observe attentively, you will perceive, brother, that whilst you and I are talking together, and thinking and smoaking our pipes: or whilst we receive successively ideas in our minds, we know that we do exist...Now, whether we observe it or no, continued my father, in every sound man's head, there is a regular succession of ideas of one sort or another which follow each other in a train...which follow and succeed one another in our minds at certain distances, just like the images in the inside of a lanthorn turned round by the heat of a candle"
(Tristram Shandy 138-139).
"The sources of what is in memory are diverse, but what happens to an impression or an idea once it gets into the brain is a single process resulting in the production of a phantasm that can be seen and scanned by 'the eye of the mind.' This sort of language is constant and pervasive in writings on the subject from the earliest times" (Carruthers 19)
In the quote shown above, Carruthers discusses the concept that has been around for a very long time about the "mind's eye." Even in conversation today this is brought up. What was different earlier on was that memory comes from a "single process" that is stored as a "phantasm" or a reproduction/image of the idea. It is purely visual, without accounting for all of the other sensory input that may have contributed, such as auditory. In this model of memory, even something simple such as a laugh would only be represented as an image, without any sort of sound to recall. It also does not allow for many ideas or processes happening at once, which is something that the brain is known to do now. Even though this concept does not seem like the most rational view to have in today's world, one can see evidence of its pervasiveness in earlier periods such as the 18th century through literature. The moment shown above from Sterne's Tristram Shandy is a great example of this.
In this scene, Mr. Shandy is trying to show how one can understand time and one's own existence to Uncle Toby. He uses again this imagery of looking in on the mind, as if the mind has its own eyes. He also seems to believe that the mind goes through one process at a time-each idea follows calmly after the other in a specific order like a train. He then goes on to equate ideas to "images in the inside of a lanthorn," which could suggest that he believes that ideas are purely visual, as well. Mr. Shandy is applying the visual, single-process model of the memory to ideas that enter the mind in general in this moment. It is also interesting that he suggests that people are capable of observing all the ideas that enter their brains and see that it is calm, orderly, and that they are able to comprehend all that is going on. This makes the mind seem like a very, very simple organ. On the other hand, the narration techniques that Sterne employs throughout this entire novel seem to negate this mentality. There are constant digressions, and sometimes the narrator even admits that he has forgotten to mention something or that he cannot follow his thoughts quickly enough.
"For if you will turn your eyes inwards upon your mind...and observe attentively, you will perceive, brother, that whilst you and I are talking together, and thinking and smoaking our pipes: or whilst we receive successively ideas in our minds, we know that we do exist...Now, whether we observe it or no, continued my father, in every sound man's head, there is a regular succession of ideas of one sort or another which follow each other in a train...which follow and succeed one another in our minds at certain distances, just like the images in the inside of a lanthorn turned round by the heat of a candle"
(Tristram Shandy 138-139).
"The sources of what is in memory are diverse, but what happens to an impression or an idea once it gets into the brain is a single process resulting in the production of a phantasm that can be seen and scanned by 'the eye of the mind.' This sort of language is constant and pervasive in writings on the subject from the earliest times" (Carruthers 19)
In the quote shown above, Carruthers discusses the concept that has been around for a very long time about the "mind's eye." Even in conversation today this is brought up. What was different earlier on was that memory comes from a "single process" that is stored as a "phantasm" or a reproduction/image of the idea. It is purely visual, without accounting for all of the other sensory input that may have contributed, such as auditory. In this model of memory, even something simple such as a laugh would only be represented as an image, without any sort of sound to recall. It also does not allow for many ideas or processes happening at once, which is something that the brain is known to do now. Even though this concept does not seem like the most rational view to have in today's world, one can see evidence of its pervasiveness in earlier periods such as the 18th century through literature. The moment shown above from Sterne's Tristram Shandy is a great example of this.
In this scene, Mr. Shandy is trying to show how one can understand time and one's own existence to Uncle Toby. He uses again this imagery of looking in on the mind, as if the mind has its own eyes. He also seems to believe that the mind goes through one process at a time-each idea follows calmly after the other in a specific order like a train. He then goes on to equate ideas to "images in the inside of a lanthorn," which could suggest that he believes that ideas are purely visual, as well. Mr. Shandy is applying the visual, single-process model of the memory to ideas that enter the mind in general in this moment. It is also interesting that he suggests that people are capable of observing all the ideas that enter their brains and see that it is calm, orderly, and that they are able to comprehend all that is going on. This makes the mind seem like a very, very simple organ. On the other hand, the narration techniques that Sterne employs throughout this entire novel seem to negate this mentality. There are constant digressions, and sometimes the narrator even admits that he has forgotten to mention something or that he cannot follow his thoughts quickly enough.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Literature and Mind Honors Post #2: Travel and Tristram Shandy
Given the understanding of coach travel that readers of Sterne's time could have had, are there ways in which the coach ride itself is adding to the "vexation" of Mr. and Mrs. Shandy in different ways?
"From Stilton, all the way to Grantham, nothing in the whole affair provoked him so much as the condolences of his friends, and the foolish figure they should both make at church the first Sunday;-of which, in the satirical vehemence of his wit, now sharpen'd a little by vexation, he would give so many humorous and provoking descriptions,-and place his rib and self in so many tormenting lights and attitudes in the face of the whole congregation;-that my mother declared, these two stages were so truly tragi-comical, that she did nothing but laugh and cry in a breath, from one end to the other of them all the way. " (Tristram Shandy 75)
"Although coach travel would have provided some protection from the irritations of the street, it was far from ideal, and not always the most comfortable option. Passengers in coaches would be "cruelly shaken" by the ruts and pot-holes, and travel unsteadily along the narrow lanes...Conversation in coaches could be awkward, stilted and frustrating. Crammed up close to strangers while being joggled about along the rutted tracks was some people's idea of a nightmare (Cockayne 179).
Within this scene from Laurence Sterne's Tristram Shandy, the reader witnesses Tristram's father getting increasingly upset during a coach ride in which he had to go retrieve his wife from London (a place he hates). Also, it is hinted that she miscarried, so this is most likely the reason since she prefers to "lye-in" in London. During his antics, Mrs. Shandy becomes increasingly upset, but amused because his behavior is so ridiculous. In a coach that has many strangers he gives "so many humorous and provoking descriptions" of how silly they will look at church. He is being extremely confrontational in front of people that do not know him or his wife or have any interest in his angry ramblings.
This situation alone is enough to make a long coach ride from London to their country home very uncomfortable and vexing, but on top of this Cockayne adds some other problems that apply most likely not only to urban areas but to roads leading to the country. The combination of the coach and the poor state of the roads leads to a very bumpy, jarring ride for those traveling in it, sometimes dangerously so. Also, the passengers are often "crammed up close to strangers." This is never a pleasant experience, and the conversation is usually awkward, so probably it is better to avoid it when possible. Mr. Shandy does not pick up on this and decides to talk as much as he pleases about what is making him mad. He is adding to the discomfort that is already there simply by riding in a coach. No wonder his wife is amused, upset, and embarrassed by him. Also, the coach ride probably agitated Mr. Shandy even more by adding all of these natural implications of the journey and the discomfort they bring to his disappointment, anger, and the like. People during Sterne's probably time knew how vexing a coach ride itself could be, and they could pick up on the humor of this situation and sympathize at the same time in a way we modern readers perhaps cannot without background knowledge.
"From Stilton, all the way to Grantham, nothing in the whole affair provoked him so much as the condolences of his friends, and the foolish figure they should both make at church the first Sunday;-of which, in the satirical vehemence of his wit, now sharpen'd a little by vexation, he would give so many humorous and provoking descriptions,-and place his rib and self in so many tormenting lights and attitudes in the face of the whole congregation;-that my mother declared, these two stages were so truly tragi-comical, that she did nothing but laugh and cry in a breath, from one end to the other of them all the way. " (Tristram Shandy 75)
"Although coach travel would have provided some protection from the irritations of the street, it was far from ideal, and not always the most comfortable option. Passengers in coaches would be "cruelly shaken" by the ruts and pot-holes, and travel unsteadily along the narrow lanes...Conversation in coaches could be awkward, stilted and frustrating. Crammed up close to strangers while being joggled about along the rutted tracks was some people's idea of a nightmare (Cockayne 179).
Within this scene from Laurence Sterne's Tristram Shandy, the reader witnesses Tristram's father getting increasingly upset during a coach ride in which he had to go retrieve his wife from London (a place he hates). Also, it is hinted that she miscarried, so this is most likely the reason since she prefers to "lye-in" in London. During his antics, Mrs. Shandy becomes increasingly upset, but amused because his behavior is so ridiculous. In a coach that has many strangers he gives "so many humorous and provoking descriptions" of how silly they will look at church. He is being extremely confrontational in front of people that do not know him or his wife or have any interest in his angry ramblings.
This situation alone is enough to make a long coach ride from London to their country home very uncomfortable and vexing, but on top of this Cockayne adds some other problems that apply most likely not only to urban areas but to roads leading to the country. The combination of the coach and the poor state of the roads leads to a very bumpy, jarring ride for those traveling in it, sometimes dangerously so. Also, the passengers are often "crammed up close to strangers." This is never a pleasant experience, and the conversation is usually awkward, so probably it is better to avoid it when possible. Mr. Shandy does not pick up on this and decides to talk as much as he pleases about what is making him mad. He is adding to the discomfort that is already there simply by riding in a coach. No wonder his wife is amused, upset, and embarrassed by him. Also, the coach ride probably agitated Mr. Shandy even more by adding all of these natural implications of the journey and the discomfort they bring to his disappointment, anger, and the like. People during Sterne's probably time knew how vexing a coach ride itself could be, and they could pick up on the humor of this situation and sympathize at the same time in a way we modern readers perhaps cannot without background knowledge.
Monday, October 14, 2013
Literature and Mind Post 7: Disgust and Tristam Shandy
Does class play a role in how prone someone is to being disgusted? What kind of evidence is there for this in Sterne's Tristam Shandy?
"-not but the planet is well enough, provided a man could be born in it to a great title or to a great estate; or could any how contrive to be called up to publick charges, and employments of dignity or power; -but that is not my case; - and therefore every man will speak of the fair as his own market has gone in it; -for which cause I affirm it over again to be one of the vilest worlds that ever was made..." (Tristam Shandy 6).
" 'Disgust' according to William Ian Miller, the author of The Anatomy of Disgust (1997), 'paints the world in a particular way, a distinctly misanthropic and melancholic way.' Inevitably, the people who left the most fulsome comments about such things were the curmudgeons or the grouches. Some people were more liable to be upset or disgusted than others" (Cockayne 1).
In Chapter 1, "The City in a Hubbub," the fact that this book will focus on the most disgusting parts of 18th century life in England is laid-out for the reader. That being said, the concept of disgust itself must be described and established, as shown above. According to this definition, the more someone is defined as grouchy, the more likely he or she is to be disgusted about life. Being disgusted leads one to see the world in a very melancholy way. In this way, the author lays out what disgust is and how it works, but does not quite go into the "why" of it all. Only the results and the traits of disgust are shown. Why are some people "more liable to be upset or disgusted than others?"
In his novel Tristam Shandy, Sterne offers up one answer for the cause of someone's likeliness to feel disgust towards the world. Tristam himself is disgusted by the world he lives in. He calls it a "scurvy and disastrous" place (5). This alone could perhaps show more contempt or condemnation of the world, but then he goes on to call it "vile" two times. Vileness is definitely associated with disgust because both words are associated with a sort of gut-churning sensation. He then goes on to say he may not have felt this way if he had been born into a better life-situation or class, but since he was born where he was, he had to think it was vile ("every man will speak of the fair as his own market has gone it"). From the beginning of the story, the reader sees a melancholy turn in the way Tristam narrates his own life and stories he has learned, which is due to this disgust he holds for the world. He himself claims that it is his class that has led him to this feeling and belief he has about the world. This is most likely not the only reason for why some are more likely to feel disgust, but it is a definite one, according to this text.
"-not but the planet is well enough, provided a man could be born in it to a great title or to a great estate; or could any how contrive to be called up to publick charges, and employments of dignity or power; -but that is not my case; - and therefore every man will speak of the fair as his own market has gone in it; -for which cause I affirm it over again to be one of the vilest worlds that ever was made..." (Tristam Shandy 6).
" 'Disgust' according to William Ian Miller, the author of The Anatomy of Disgust (1997), 'paints the world in a particular way, a distinctly misanthropic and melancholic way.' Inevitably, the people who left the most fulsome comments about such things were the curmudgeons or the grouches. Some people were more liable to be upset or disgusted than others" (Cockayne 1).
In Chapter 1, "The City in a Hubbub," the fact that this book will focus on the most disgusting parts of 18th century life in England is laid-out for the reader. That being said, the concept of disgust itself must be described and established, as shown above. According to this definition, the more someone is defined as grouchy, the more likely he or she is to be disgusted about life. Being disgusted leads one to see the world in a very melancholy way. In this way, the author lays out what disgust is and how it works, but does not quite go into the "why" of it all. Only the results and the traits of disgust are shown. Why are some people "more liable to be upset or disgusted than others?"
In his novel Tristam Shandy, Sterne offers up one answer for the cause of someone's likeliness to feel disgust towards the world. Tristam himself is disgusted by the world he lives in. He calls it a "scurvy and disastrous" place (5). This alone could perhaps show more contempt or condemnation of the world, but then he goes on to call it "vile" two times. Vileness is definitely associated with disgust because both words are associated with a sort of gut-churning sensation. He then goes on to say he may not have felt this way if he had been born into a better life-situation or class, but since he was born where he was, he had to think it was vile ("every man will speak of the fair as his own market has gone it"). From the beginning of the story, the reader sees a melancholy turn in the way Tristam narrates his own life and stories he has learned, which is due to this disgust he holds for the world. He himself claims that it is his class that has led him to this feeling and belief he has about the world. This is most likely not the only reason for why some are more likely to feel disgust, but it is a definite one, according to this text.
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
Literature and Mind Honors Post #1: Fiction and the Scientific Hypothesis in the 18th Century
In what ways is Lennox's The Female Quixote demonstrating Bender's concept of "possible" but "verisimilar" with "imaginative or speculative" truth? How does the novel in general demonstrate the methods of scientific discourse and have the ability to spur similar discourse?
"Yet I will not pardon you, added she, without enjoining you with a Penance for the Fault you own you have committed; and this Penance shall be to prove,
First, That these Histories you condemn are Fictions.
Next, That they are absurd.
And Lastly, That they are Criminal" (The Female Quixote 374).
"For against the backdrop of a commitment shared by the two realms to the system of verisimilitude, the novel began to ground science's claim to be non-fiction by becoming increasingly the domain of manifest through probable fictionality. Then, in a doubly paradoxical twist at midcentury, as I propose, the move toward verisimilar yet "possible" fiction that occurred with Lennox, Sterne, and Walpole participated (relationally, not causally) in a turn toward the more imaginative or speculative variant of "truth" advocated by Diderot and Buffon" (Bender 20).
Within Bender's essay, "Enlightenment Fiction and the Scientific Hypothesis," the author is discussion the move within the scientific community toward public discourse and consensus, and the use of hypotheses and induction in order to come up with new concepts. Many were condemned for using hypotheses because they could be considered "fictional," but as actually works of fiction went on to become less objective and more subjective, works of non-fiction even with hypotheses became more commonly accepted. The concept of speculative "truth" that was discussed by many such as Buffon, was one that emphasized finding out the "how" and never the "why" of something, and this something had to be a physical truth.
Looking at the quote above from The Female Quixote, where Arabella demands that her doctor give her proof for why she should give up her peculiar code of conduct as shown in romances, the reader sees this kind of truth that is laid-out by Buffon. Arabella is asking how these claims the doctor makes can be true, not why he is making them. The doctor, in turn, is able to convince her using inductive methods based in common knowledge of the world and how it works ("physical truth"). This also is a great example of how such "public discourse" could have happened at the time, and how people went about figuring out what was true and what was not.
Also, Lennox's novel as a whole is a great testament to the ways people thought about hypotheses and truth in general, because many of the discussions that have occurred in class deal exactly with this issue of the "how" of events that occur. Many people have argued that Arabella is having a delusion rather than dealing with obsession, or that Arabella is actually just messing with the minds of the people around her. The way these speculations have been approached have been through the "how" rather than the why because it is "possible" that romances could cloud the mind. It is almost as if in 2013 in this class there is a public "scientific" discourse happening, if using the qualifications set-out in the 18th century.
"Yet I will not pardon you, added she, without enjoining you with a Penance for the Fault you own you have committed; and this Penance shall be to prove,
First, That these Histories you condemn are Fictions.
Next, That they are absurd.
And Lastly, That they are Criminal" (The Female Quixote 374).
"For against the backdrop of a commitment shared by the two realms to the system of verisimilitude, the novel began to ground science's claim to be non-fiction by becoming increasingly the domain of manifest through probable fictionality. Then, in a doubly paradoxical twist at midcentury, as I propose, the move toward verisimilar yet "possible" fiction that occurred with Lennox, Sterne, and Walpole participated (relationally, not causally) in a turn toward the more imaginative or speculative variant of "truth" advocated by Diderot and Buffon" (Bender 20).
Within Bender's essay, "Enlightenment Fiction and the Scientific Hypothesis," the author is discussion the move within the scientific community toward public discourse and consensus, and the use of hypotheses and induction in order to come up with new concepts. Many were condemned for using hypotheses because they could be considered "fictional," but as actually works of fiction went on to become less objective and more subjective, works of non-fiction even with hypotheses became more commonly accepted. The concept of speculative "truth" that was discussed by many such as Buffon, was one that emphasized finding out the "how" and never the "why" of something, and this something had to be a physical truth.
Looking at the quote above from The Female Quixote, where Arabella demands that her doctor give her proof for why she should give up her peculiar code of conduct as shown in romances, the reader sees this kind of truth that is laid-out by Buffon. Arabella is asking how these claims the doctor makes can be true, not why he is making them. The doctor, in turn, is able to convince her using inductive methods based in common knowledge of the world and how it works ("physical truth"). This also is a great example of how such "public discourse" could have happened at the time, and how people went about figuring out what was true and what was not.
Also, Lennox's novel as a whole is a great testament to the ways people thought about hypotheses and truth in general, because many of the discussions that have occurred in class deal exactly with this issue of the "how" of events that occur. Many people have argued that Arabella is having a delusion rather than dealing with obsession, or that Arabella is actually just messing with the minds of the people around her. The way these speculations have been approached have been through the "how" rather than the why because it is "possible" that romances could cloud the mind. It is almost as if in 2013 in this class there is a public "scientific" discourse happening, if using the qualifications set-out in the 18th century.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Literature and Mind Post 6: Absorption and The Female Quixote
What is the difference between Lamb's absorption in books in general in "Detached Thoughts on Books and Reading"and Arabella's obsession with her romances in The Female Quixote? What line has been crossed?
"Arabella. when she had pronounced these Words, blushed excessively, thinking she had said too much: But, not seeing any Signs of extreme Joy in the Face of Glanville, who was silently cursing Cleopatra, and the Authors of those Romances, that had ruined so noble a Mind; and exposed him to perpetual Vexations by the unaccountable Whims they had raised..." (The Female Quixote p.115)
"...I must confess that I dedicate no inconsiderable portion of my time to other people's thoughts. I dream away my life in others' speculations. I love to lose myself in other men's minds. When I am not walking, I am reading; I cannot sit and think. Books think for me." (Lamb)
Within The Female Quixote, the reader sees all the complications that can come from letting "books think for you" in the words of Lamb. Letting herself get lost in the minds of the authors of romances, Arabella has apparently ruined her mind. She cannot see it for herself, but those around her most certainly see it. On the other hand, there is Lamb, who in "Detached Thoughts on Books and Reading" talks lovingly about his own absorption in books. As shown above, he, like Arabella in some ways, likes to immerse his mind in the ideas of other people. He still seems perfectly sane and well-adjusted, unlike the heroine of The Female Quixote, which leads to the question: What is the difference in the approach of immersing oneself in a book between Lamb and Arabella? What makes Arabella become obsessed and unable to function with in the society in her day, whereas it seems that Lamb has not made that jump to obsession?
One difference could be how specific the focal point of the absorption is. Arabella is focused on a very specific genre of books, and only those that are already in her library. This means a more narrow flow of ideas that probably have similarities throughout all of them. On the other hand, Lamb is talking about books in general. He reads a variety of things with a variety of points of view. It seems that Lamb by saying he "dedicates time" to others' minds, that he is immersed in the thoughts only while he is actively reading the book, rather than being immersed in the thoughts forever and ever. Perhaps by these two examples, the line between absorption and obsession is not one that is crossed while reading. It happens after one puts the book down. If the book "thinks for" a person even after they are done reading it, such as Arabella, this is when the obsession kicks in.
"Arabella. when she had pronounced these Words, blushed excessively, thinking she had said too much: But, not seeing any Signs of extreme Joy in the Face of Glanville, who was silently cursing Cleopatra, and the Authors of those Romances, that had ruined so noble a Mind; and exposed him to perpetual Vexations by the unaccountable Whims they had raised..." (The Female Quixote p.115)
"...I must confess that I dedicate no inconsiderable portion of my time to other people's thoughts. I dream away my life in others' speculations. I love to lose myself in other men's minds. When I am not walking, I am reading; I cannot sit and think. Books think for me." (Lamb)
Within The Female Quixote, the reader sees all the complications that can come from letting "books think for you" in the words of Lamb. Letting herself get lost in the minds of the authors of romances, Arabella has apparently ruined her mind. She cannot see it for herself, but those around her most certainly see it. On the other hand, there is Lamb, who in "Detached Thoughts on Books and Reading" talks lovingly about his own absorption in books. As shown above, he, like Arabella in some ways, likes to immerse his mind in the ideas of other people. He still seems perfectly sane and well-adjusted, unlike the heroine of The Female Quixote, which leads to the question: What is the difference in the approach of immersing oneself in a book between Lamb and Arabella? What makes Arabella become obsessed and unable to function with in the society in her day, whereas it seems that Lamb has not made that jump to obsession?
One difference could be how specific the focal point of the absorption is. Arabella is focused on a very specific genre of books, and only those that are already in her library. This means a more narrow flow of ideas that probably have similarities throughout all of them. On the other hand, Lamb is talking about books in general. He reads a variety of things with a variety of points of view. It seems that Lamb by saying he "dedicates time" to others' minds, that he is immersed in the thoughts only while he is actively reading the book, rather than being immersed in the thoughts forever and ever. Perhaps by these two examples, the line between absorption and obsession is not one that is crossed while reading. It happens after one puts the book down. If the book "thinks for" a person even after they are done reading it, such as Arabella, this is when the obsession kicks in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)