Received: from gibbs.oit.unc.edu (gibbs.oit.unc.edu [152.2.25.2]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/CNS-4.0p) with ESMTP id IAA18063 for <socgrad@csf.colorado.edu>; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 08:20:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by gibbs.oit.unc.edu (8.7.5/10.1)
	id KAA04120; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:20:03 -0400 (GMT+4:00)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:20:01 -0400
From: Pamela Paxton <ppaxton@gibbs.oit.unc.edu>
To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: Fw: Bad writing competition (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199706060731.DAA98140@pilot19.cl.msu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.CVX.3.91.970609095743.16062D-100000@gibbs.oit.unc.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> gee, what fun--mocking "postmodern" writing by enforcing some criteria of
> "good writing." boy that's original.  better get our canons out, the
> infidels are at the gates.
>        jargon for thee and not for me...
> 
> r garcia

Anytime I can't determine whether an idea is original, interesting, or 
important because of horrific writing, its a problem.

"some criteria of good writing" exist for a reason.  When ideas are 
presented clearly then they can be evaluated, and evaluation is an essential 
component of the academic exercise.

Pam Paxton