ayjay:

newyorker:

Teju Cole on the civilizing function of literature, and the disparity between Obama’s bookshelf and his use of targeted killings:

How on earth did this happen to the reader in chief? What became of literature’s vaunted power to inspire empathy? Why was the candidate Obama, in word and in deed, so radically different from the President he became?

Continue reading: http://nyr.kr/WYUGMz

Photograph: Pete Souza/The White House/Getty.

It’s so strange to me that there is still anyone anywhere who think that there is any connection whatsoever between a given person’s reading preferences and his or her moral stature. There is no “civilizing function of literature”; people will only benefit morally from reading literature if they already have a strong moral formation. As Terry Eagleton wrote many years ago about the deeply cultured officers of the Third Reich, “When the Allied troops moved into the concentration camps … to arrest commandants who had whiled away their leisure hours with a volume of Goethe, it appeared that someone had some explaining to do.” Cole mentions this uncomfortable fact, but, reluctant to draw the obvious conclusion from it, remains puzzled that the President’s political and military decisions could somehow be at odds with what Cole imagines that a reader of Derek Walcott’s poetry would be likely to do. This is misbegotten in more ways than I can even list.

Yes. Reading does not make one any less terrible.

wheninacademia:

WHEN I SUBMITTED THE FINAL DRAFT OF MY THESIS
Peter Vidani, tumblr.com

When In Acad­e­mia

RSS Archive

oh, these prob­lem­at­i­cal­ly decon­tex­tu­al­ized mov­ing images. Tell me your trou­bles, dar­lings.

WHEN I SUB­MIT­TED THE FINAL DRAFT OF MY THE­SIS:

4:01pm

I still feel this way:

wheninacademia:

(via michaelfunderburk)

(via michaelfunderburk)

wheninacademia:

everydayimpastoring:

It’s true. It’s true. It’s true.

(via pushcomestolove)