> I never understood people who say their English writing is "bullshitting". Oh you read the book and offered a plausible interpretation? That sounds to me like learning and creating.

It was bullshitting, because it was not even an attempt at a good analysis of what the author actually wrote or meant to write. I know for a fact that I was not trying to analyze the book. When I am actually trying to analyze a text, I think about it differently and treat it differently.

The thought process was closer to what I do when I am joking around, it is just that result was put into formal language.

It was a bit like a debate club - you know you are having sleazy untrue argument, but it is being rewarded, so.

> That sounds to me like learning and creating.

I dont think I learned much or anything about literature. I did created something. I learned something that, imo, schools should teach less - generate BS on command.

> I never understood people who say their English writing is "bullshitting". Oh you read the book and offered a plausible interpretation? That sounds to me like learning and creating.

I'm skeptical that watwut was as good in HS English lit as he claims to be: see his other response to me - he basically believes that recycling plot points is both meaningless (correct) and a path to high marks in literature (incorrect) :-/

I mean, it's possible but unlikely that plot examination will lead to good marks.