RE: 4.1 and satire

Actually, Jonathan, there's a great deal of art that isn't accessible, and a
good deal of it is quite deliberately inaccessible-- the work of the High
Modernists in English and American poetry is a good example (T.S. Eliot, for
instance)  And some artists don't care a fig whether or not their work
sells.

I posed my query in all seriousness, though: is it possible for satire of
the sort I described to claim conformance to checkpoint 4.1 at any level?

John

John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C, Mail code G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web http://www.ital.utexas.edu
 


-----Original Message-----
From: jonathan chetwynd [mailto:j.chetwynd@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 11:03 am
To: john_slatin
Cc: Web Content Guidelines
Subject: Re: 4.1 and satire


Our students* have almost no, or at least very little understanding of pun.
I understood it is a common misconception that some nationalities fail 
to see the irony.
the joke is lost in the telling? doing rather than talking, gosh i bore 
even myself on occassion.

another reason why triple AAA ranking should require that its meaning is 
understood by all.
AA is quite enough for any drier intellect, and really A should suffice.

Art is accessible, it has to sell.

jonathan chetwynd

with severe learning difficulties