I'd like to think not. Seamus Perry of The Times (London) reviews a new book called The Oxford Book of Parodies, by John Gross. Perry cites with some approval the notion that parody is "shorthand for what ‘serious’ critics must write out at length," and nods at the notion that it is a "vulgar art" - yet he plainly loves it, and Gross's book. He seems to be of two minds of the subject, or perhaps he just loves it as the low brow art of the high brow reader.
Which prompts - what else? - a parody, somewhat arbitrarily in the manner of Coleridge:
It is an ancient scrivener,
And he stoppeth one of three.
He asks, is parody high or low?
"Yes," replies Perry.
None of which is to say that he's wrong, mind you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment