Interesting indeed - but Seitse, your worst fears are but a click away
It's interesting not least as a historical document: it's so clearly a product of its time and place, and a valuable record of academic mores and preferences dominant in the US, very specifically, at that time. It's parochial in extremis, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
So I'm hesitant actually to criticise
it in any real way - although having only Part 1 of Don Quixote
strikes me as a mistake - the involution of Part 2 is really important - like an anachronistic fragment of Romanticism; and the absence of anything
by either Marx or Freud was something of a shock.
I suppose we should be talking about what we'd remove and add to bring it up to date...
EDIT: thinking about the time it was first printed, I might be prepared to let him off with Freud, since he couldn't have known the impact Freud would have, or was already having. But Marx?