A couple interesting (to me) links tonight.
Rick Gekoski, writing in the Guardian, gets all curmudgeonly about book lovers:
If you think that reading the right things in the right ways is morally bracing, improves one’s discriminations and heightens sensitivity – basically, the Leavis line – then all you have to do is look at the behaviour of Dr Leavis himself to begin to doubt the thesis. Indeed, if it were true that wide and deep reading redounds wholly positively on the development of a wholesome self, consider a typical member of a university English department, and despair.
He scores some nice hits, as in the passage above, but also takes some shots at comments by Milton and C. S. Lewis that strike me as just snarky (I’ll admit I’m prejudiced in the matter). Frankly, he reminds me a little of one of those misanthropes who can’t see a young couple in love without muttering, “Give ’em a couple years and they’ll be hiring hit men to murder each other.”
Tip: Joe Carter at First Things.
Dennis Ingolfsland, at The Recliner Commentaries, quotes a book that sounds fascinating, Is God a Moral Monster, by Paul Copan:
Though I used to complain about the indecency of the idea of God’s wrath, I came to think that I would have to rebel against a God who wasn’t wrathful at the sight of the world’s evil. God isn’t wrathful in spite of being love. God is wrathful because God is love (Miroslav Volf as quoted in Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan, 192).
That noise you hear in the distance is me yelling, “YES! YES!”