What I meant by must be seen as is: Don't think just of how the work fit in
the days it was written, but also how it holds up. I did not mean to assert
that works always had a beneficial effect.
>useful way of seeing it. Sometimes, it is more useful to view it as a
>of those ailments rather than a treatment. Otherwise, what are we to do
>things like Pound's, Eliot's, Hemingway's, Cather's, and Fitzgerald's
I don't believe that their bigotry ADDED to their works or that they are
literature BECAUSE of it. Bigotry is today seen as a wart itself, and works
flawed for containing it. But no one ever asserted literature had to be
perfect to be great.