Please explain the meaning

Question

You probably have to turn your dial all the way back to Edmund Wilson to find a writer possessing not just the discriminating sensibilities of Leonard but also the vibrant, restless inability to sit on a set of certainties. The latter, populist in nature and as such at odds with the power that strong critics wield, is an achievement that might go undersung, but it shouldn’t, and I imagine that is why Leonard became such a strong father figure for so many younger critics like Meghan O’Rourke

1. What does the phrase "restless inability to sit on a set of certainties." in the above sentence mean? Does it says that Leonard never stuck with the certainties?

2. What does the word "latter" refers to?

3. What does "at odds" mean? Does it mean that "The latter" (whatever it refers to) didn't have the power that strong critics had or "the latter" had power that exceeded that of ordinary strong critics?

GB

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

I think it means that Leonard was unconventional and unpredictable, in a restless sort of way. He didn't stick to a consistent formula.
The latter refers to this second quality.. (the first being the "discriminating sensibilities")
"at odds with" means "seemingly incompatible with"
I think the point he is making is that critics are usually predictable, and get their power from a consistent, unwavering approach to their commentary. Leonard was a populist, very unusual for a critic (they are usually elitists). He is a role model for a younger generation of critics.

RayH · Answer

You've certainly found yourself a dense, obtuse, and confusing bit of writing here. One might say pompous if one was feeling uncharitable.

I looked up the whole article and can barely make heads or tails of it. I set out to write a detailed answer to your questions but the more I struggled with it the more I realized that the article you quote from is incomprehensible. I could make some guesses as to what the author meant but the fact that he makes his reader work that hard is inexcusable.

Apparently Leonard was quite the famous and respected critic so I suppose it's possible that he is assuming knowledge about Leonard that I don't have, maybe someone else can comment on this.

I just noticed that AlpheccaStars has offered a better answer that I would likely have come up with; nevertheless, I stand by my comments above.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

RayHYou've certainly found yourself a dense, obtuse, and confusing bit of writing here. One might say pompous if one was feeling uncharitable.

Well, Ray, what did you expect? I find it most humerous and ironic that the author is on the National Book Critics Circle board of directors

Please explain the meaning

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions