<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Not My Everyman: Moral Degeneracy in Daniel Defoe’s Character of Robinson Crusoe</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/11/not-my-everyman-moral-degeneracy-in-daniel-defoe%e2%80%99s-character-of-robinson-crusoe/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/11/not-my-everyman-moral-degeneracy-in-daniel-defoe%e2%80%99s-character-of-robinson-crusoe/</link>
	<description>a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:07:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rhondda</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/11/not-my-everyman-moral-degeneracy-in-daniel-defoe%e2%80%99s-character-of-robinson-crusoe/#comment-58754</link>
		<dc:creator>rhondda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dissidentvoice.org/?p=11768#comment-58754</guid>
		<description>I loved this analysis.  When I was at university years ago taking English literature, I used to say that the works were male fantasy, especially their women characters.  Then I realized that so was the hero.  Needless to say, my professors were not impressed. I had a hard time regurgitating.  You know they were works of art and timeless and all men were heroes and all women desperate for them. Now we get it with women writers too We never read women writers when I was at the great institution. That was too bad as there are some very interesting female fantasies  especially these days.  Thanks for this.  It made my day.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I loved this analysis.  When I was at university years ago taking English literature, I used to say that the works were male fantasy, especially their women characters.  Then I realized that so was the hero.  Needless to say, my professors were not impressed. I had a hard time regurgitating.  You know they were works of art and timeless and all men were heroes and all women desperate for them. Now we get it with women writers too We never read women writers when I was at the great institution. That was too bad as there are some very interesting female fantasies  especially these days.  Thanks for this.  It made my day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hi Top</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/11/not-my-everyman-moral-degeneracy-in-daniel-defoe%e2%80%99s-character-of-robinson-crusoe/#comment-58731</link>
		<dc:creator>Hi Top</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:22:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dissidentvoice.org/?p=11768#comment-58731</guid>
		<description>Loved the work, a great outline for the beginning of empiricism in lit.  We definitely need surveys like this, esp. since we have individuals such as Mr. Kenny who don&#039;t understand the relationship between art and life.  Would love to see your reading of Conrad&#039;s HoD.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Loved the work, a great outline for the beginning of empiricism in lit.  We definitely need surveys like this, esp. since we have individuals such as Mr. Kenny who don&#8217;t understand the relationship between art and life.  Would love to see your reading of Conrad&#8217;s HoD.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Kenny</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/11/not-my-everyman-moral-degeneracy-in-daniel-defoe%e2%80%99s-character-of-robinson-crusoe/#comment-58706</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Kenny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dissidentvoice.org/?p=11768#comment-58706</guid>
		<description>The idea that Robinson Crusoe could be &quot;admirable&quot; or otherwise is nonsense. Crusoe never existed! The author&#039;s work in creating him might be admirable (or not) as a piece of English literature, but it is meaningless to judge a fictional character as if a real human being with his personality had actually existed, or even more absurd, exists today. Is Defoe&#039;s characterisation an accurate depiction of a Scottish seaman in 1719? That&#039;s the question that could usefully be asked. The rest, as they say, is not history. It&#039;s just fiction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The idea that Robinson Crusoe could be &#8220;admirable&#8221; or otherwise is nonsense. Crusoe never existed! The author&#8217;s work in creating him might be admirable (or not) as a piece of English literature, but it is meaningless to judge a fictional character as if a real human being with his personality had actually existed, or even more absurd, exists today. Is Defoe&#8217;s characterisation an accurate depiction of a Scottish seaman in 1719? That&#8217;s the question that could usefully be asked. The rest, as they say, is not history. It&#8217;s just fiction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

