From: Jennifer Formichelli [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

PM: If the epigraph's meaning/feeling/sensation
   suffuse the poem, then it is IN the poem.
JF: If the epigraph is IN the poem, then it is not an epigraph.
PM: I could live with that, but I don't see why epigraphicity
    is exclusive of inclusivity.

    What's your opinion of the pseudepigraph of Auden's
    "Unknown Citizen"? Is it in or out? Neither or both?
JF: As for metaphor, I think the metaphorical should be
    an extension rather than a contradiction of the literal.

PM: Aha! A different subject!!!
    I will leave it to the real tropers on the list.
    I'm sure the anything I have to say on the subject
    would be considered by Nancy de trop. As it is, I'm
    having enough fun being as precisely unpicky with you
    as I dare.
JF>That is because the attachment of an epigraph is a critical act.
>PM>Secondarily yes. Primarily it is a creative act.
>JF:I believe it is an act at once critical and creative.
     See TSE, 'The Function of Criticism', 1923.
PM:Obviously they are synchronous, but to be effecive the
   epigraph has to resonate with the poem, not just be
   on the appropriate subject. Being effective is primary,
   and since effectiveness depends on resonance which in
   turn depends on creative intuition, I corncider the
   creative primary. Even if you disagree with my point,
   I hope that it is precise enough for you. It is not too
   picky for me.