On 2/9/2018 8:08 AM, Rickard A. Parker wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 15:14:24 -0500, Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I don't know if this is quite relevant but the re.is has been the issue
>> discussed in the controversy surrounding the latest Star War trilogy. In
>> the original trilogy Luke trained under master Yoda in the ways of the
>> force. The training was long and difficult and the immature Luke protested
>> and was disciplined for this by the master. In the latest trilogy, the
>> character Rey somehow has mastered the ways of the force without training
>> of any kind. There has been fan fan revolt over this. On Rottentomatoes,
>> the latest movie (The Last Jedi) has a 91% critic rating but only a 48% fan
>> rating. A common fan objection to the current trilogy is previously that
>> Rey did not earn the tradition of the force.
> Ezra Pound wrote the following about Eliot:
> "He has actually trained himself and modernized himself on his own."
> Yet Eliot wrote about tradition.
Is there a contradiction there? Eliot wrote, "The existing
monuments form an ideal order among themselves, which is modified by the
introduction of the new (the really new) work of art among them.” What
Pound is saying is that Eliot has put himself in the position of being
able to produce not just the latest fad, fashion, or fantasy, but "the
really new" work of art, ie. the one in genuine communication with
tradition. For Pound and Eliot, "modern" doesn't mean disconnected from
the past; it means speaking the language of the present in recognition
of its relation to, as Arbery put it, the living past. How well each of
them did in that regard is another question but does not invalidate
Pound's recognition of Eliot's self-imposed "training." I'm not sure how
or whether this all relates to the Jedi, but the complaint there seems
to be in regard to the falsification of the past instead of the
recognition of it essential to "the really new."