Marcia Karp wrote:
> Carrol Cox wrote:
> [clip]
> Carrol,
>     I'm not sure I can so easily hold onto the idea of plowing absent something that
> plows and something that is plowed, but I understand what you are saying about the
> action.

I think you have to in some sense, or you edge towards an icarian fall
into the sea of matter or an idealism. Social relations are real (and
material) but they are not physical. Their invisibility is the peg upon
which a Margaret Thatcher can hang her proposition that society does not
exist, only individuals (and, she adds, thus plunging into incoherence,
families). Notice in fact that genera and species are not 'visible' but
only intelligible. You can see _a_ lion or _a_ book but you can't see
(sensibly perceive) lion or book, let alone mammal or language. This is
why Locke's radical empiricism leads to Berkeley's radical idealism.

Kenner is, in effect, claiming that Aristotle's theory of metaphor is
the same as his theory of plot: a drama imitates an action; so does a
metaphor. I've never thought about how this might apply to other tropes.

A friend calls Marx Aristotle with an attitude.

> > Aristotle's praise of metaphor as showing the recognition of resemblances
> And in showing differences, no?  "The plow plows the field" is not news.

This is what Johnson explores in his discussion of simile in the Life of
Pope. There does have to be difference to establish a species. If
rabbits were the only mammal they wouldn't be a species. (I am, of
course, using "species" and "genus" in the old rhetorical and logical
senses, not as technical terms from biology.)


> Marcia