Years ago, a group of brilliant young men at the University of Wisconsin seemed to have amazing creative literary talent. They were 56 poets, novelists and essayists. They were extraordinary, in their ability, to put the English language 57 , These 58 young men met regularly to read and critique each other’s work. And critique it they did!
These men were merciless 59 one another. They 60 the most minute literary expression 61 a hundred pieces. They were heartless, tough, even mean in their criticism. The sessions became 62 arenas of literary criticism that the members of this exclusive club called them- selves "Stranglers."
63 , the women of literary talent in the university, were determined to start a club of , one comparable to the Stranglers. They called themselves "Wranglers." They, too, read their works 65 . But there was one great difference. The criticism was much softer, more positive, more encouraging 66 there was 67 criticism at all. Every effort, even the most feeble one, was encouraged.
Twenty years later, when an alumnus(男校友)of the university 68 an exhaustive study of his classmates’ careers, he noticed a vast difference in the literary 69 of the Stranglers 70 the Wranglers. Of all the bright young men in the Stranglers, not one had made a significant literary accomplishment 71 . From the Wranglers had come six or more successful writers, some of national renown such as Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings. 72 wrote The Yearling.
Talent between the two Probably the same. Level of education 73 difference. But the Stranglers strangled, while the Wranglers 74 to give each other a life. The Stranglers promoted an atmosphere of contention and self-doubt. The Wranglers 75 the best, not the worst.