Honestly, every "intellectual" avenue I turn down, especially the literary ones, is all resigned and depressed. We can only "cull or surrender." That's all being well read is. Culling and surrendering. Boo-hoo.

One of the great benefits of the post-modern movement has been that it told us that literature repeats itself. Over and over again. So really, there's not as much out there to read as you might think. Though there's still more than anyone will ever read in a lifetime, it's not as if we cannot become knowledgeable enough to make intelligent decisions and conversations. And, i think, that's all that really matters when it comes to being well-read or well-anything.

Let me be clear though, I'm not saying that we don't cull or surrender in determining our interests. We most definitely do, but I think it's pointless and juvenile to obsess and lament this fact. We do our best. That's all we can hope to do. And that's just fine. And, as it turns out, it will probably be more than most human beings in history have ever done for the simple reason that we stand on their shoulders.

When Roger Ebert laments that no one reads Ginsberg anymore, it's not entirely justified. So much of literature is a reflection of its context. Language itself evolves over time. Ginsberg very well may not connect with readers today the way he did, because the world is different.

Certain motifs will stand the test of time, that has already proven true. But that says nothing about certain authors. Ginsberg may be reinvented in the future, if his themes prove essential enough to the human experience. Ironically, in not reading Ginsberg, we don't necessarily lose him.

So no, I don't much share this author's sentiments.