Print

Print


Dear Listers,

Some of our off-topic judgments and evaluations on seem to be a bit too
strict, I daresay a bit too categorical. With all due respect, I hardly
expect ready-made truth announcements on the subject of world politics (or
on any subject, “a jerk like Berlusconi, “the moron”
Bush, and the “definitely third rate actor-in-politics” A.Sh.
included) from a European or an American with a corresponding cultural
background. Especially from a non-politician, but a humble admirer of
modernist poetry in general and/or Eliot’s verse in particular, like
myself. As the reader of most messages who rarely jumps into discussion, I
would definitely welcome more flexibility, or perhaps even indirectness in
our judgments, which may prove helpful in discussing fields beyond our
direct expertise.

Temur





On Oct 9 2003, Automatic digest processor wrote:

> There are 20 messages totalling 1164 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
>   1. OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al. (8)
>    > Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 09:51:46 +0200
> From:    Gunnar Jauch <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> am 7.10.03 15:39 Uhr schrieb Nancy Gish unter [log in to unmask]:
>
> > Dear Gunnar,
> >
> > You're preaching to the choir.
>
> Not necessarily, dear Nancy.
> There are lots of tacit Bush admirers on this list, just take Eugene, our
> patriotic Wall Street poet or Ken A. ... Not too many would admit it,
> though. It's kind of an embarrassing thing, like having bad breath or
> athlete's foot.
>
> > But as I always point out, Americans
> > did not, in fact, "trust" to Bush.  They voted for Gore by half a
> > million.  After 9/11 there was such terror here that people truly
> > needed to believe in someone.  Bush seems to have squandered
> > that.  His is now back down in polls to where he was before it, and a
> > solid majority of Americans believe we are "seriously on the wrong
> > track."  I don't know if that poll has been reported where you are.
> > Plus the leak of a CIA operative is a big problem for him--especially
> > since his father ran the CIA.
> >
> > California, on the other hand. . . . . .
>
> And they did it again!
> After turning a third rate actor into a President.
>
> That's pretty sickening. Goes to show what show biz can do.
>
> This was how a jerk like Berlusconi became Italy's President:
> He simply owned most Italy's TV channels...
>
> > Nancy
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 09:54:09 +0200
> From:    Gunnar Jauch <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> am 7.10.03 23:29 Uhr schrieb Carrol Cox unter [log in to unmask]:
>
> > Nancy Gish - Women's Studies wrote:
> >>
> >> [clip]
> >
> >> But the question is what should be done to  prevent that.  An
> >> argument was made and can still be made that inspections worked
> >> and were working and that is why his "program" was not producing.
> >> Why are we, then, not invading North Korea?
>
>
> Simple: 'cause there ain't no oil there...
>
>
> Gunnar
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 22:08:01 +1000
> From:    Peter Dillane <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: T.E. vs D.H.
>
> I don't get to this machine often - has anyone run with this? I think I
> may have seen something tangential to some other account suggesting this.
> One of the recent TEL biographies has pursued his mother's background and
> changed the story a bit. I will have to chase that if it is still of
> interest to you - might take a day 'cause no books to hand. The old
> account was that Sarah Lawrence was the illegitimate daughter of John
> Lawrence a ship builder and of course as Peter O"Toole told us (in the
> same breathless way he anticipated Gordon Liddy that the trick is not to
> care about pain) the old man was Sir Thomas Chapman. "He wasn't married
> to my mother.
>
> Cheers Pete
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 10:49 AM
> Subject: T.E. vs D.H.
>
>
> > Somewhere along the line I heard, learned, was taught
> > or otherwise imbibed the so-called information that
> > T.E. Lawrence AND D.H. Lawrence were distantly related.
> > So far neither I nor my incredibly knowledgeable internet
> > buddy/guru have been able to ascertain anything to back
> > that possibility up.
> >
> > Anyone know anything about it?
> >
> > Thanks muchly for your time and patience,
> > Peter
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 05:51:32 -0700
> From:    Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Is TWM a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> The premier issue of a new magazine in Canada contans
> a review by Lewis Lapham of a new book on Marshall
> Mcluhan (what else do you expect in Canada?)
>
> Lapham, among other things, made the point that
> Mcluhan worte his books to give people  methods to
> resist the developments in society being driven by
> electronic technology. Mcluhan was a conservative who
> wished to preserve an older way of dealing with the
> world. He was a great admirer of the work of TSE.
>
> This brings up an issue which has puzzled me and
> perhaps someone in the group can provide me with some
> insight.
>
> Mcluhan distinguised between cool and hot media. Hot
> media tends to indvidual study and opinion and
> interpretation with direct arguments. Cool media is
> holistic. Its arguments come from collective social
> images and interpretation is done collectively by
> communities. Its arguments are highly non-linear. At
> least this is how I interpreted the terms hot and cool
> from my long ago reading of Mcluhan.
>
> By my interpretation of Mcluhan at least, TWL is a
> cool poem. Its arguments are not linear but exist
> holisitcally in images that repeat throughout the
> poem. It is not a poem that will surrender to the
> individual study that a hot medium encourages. Its
> interpretation can only be a collective enterprise
> with opinions being held and shaped collectively.
>
> I suppose my question is if there is any merit in this
> idea. IS TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan? If
> so, then why did TSE hold an attraction for someone
> who objected to the creation of cool media?
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:28:16 -0400
> From:    [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> You've raised a fascinating subject. I believe there is no such
> constitutional bar recognized presently, though many people believe there
> is and a vigorous minority claims that the constitutional bar has been
> abrogated by a conspiracy of lawyers.
>
> When I was admitted to the bar, I was of course let in on the
> conspiracy. I therefore can refer you to a website that is rather
> enlightening on the general subject (though I am by secret oath required
> to reference only souces that are hostile to the lawyers-as-conspirators
> theory). See <<http://www.thirdamendment.com/nobility.html>>.
>
> Tom K
>
> In a message dated 10/7/2003 8:38:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Nancy
> Gish - Women's Studies" <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>
> > The Supreme Court does not define authority; it interprets the
> > Constitution. Like the president and the congress, the Supreme Court
> > can do only what the Constitution says it can. . . . They could not,
> > >for example, rule that an American could become a duke since that is
> > forbidden in the Constitution.>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:16:22 -0400
> From:    [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> I noticed that the link below goes to a more general website than I had
> thought. The part of interest is "The Real Titles of Nobility Amendment
> FAQ (September 1996)"
>
> Tom K
>
> In a message dated 10/8/2003 11:28:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> > You've raised a fascinating subject. I believe there is no such
> > constitutional bar recognized presently, though many people believe
> > there is and a vigorous minority claims that the constitutional bar has
> > been abrogated by a conspiracy of lawyers.
> >
> > When I was admitted to the bar, I was of course let in on the
> > conspiracy. I therefore can refer you to a website that is rather
> > enlightening on the general subject (though I am by secret oath
> > required to reference only souces that are hostile to the
> > lawyers-as-conspirators theory). See
> > <<http://www.thirdamendment.com/nobility.html>>.
> >
> >Tom K
> >
> > In a message dated 10/7/2003 8:38:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Nancy
> > Gish - Women's Studies" <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> >
> >> The Supreme Court does not define authority; it interprets the
> >> Constitution. Like the president and the congress, the Supreme Court
> >> can do only what the Constitution says it can. . . . They could not,
> >> >for example, rule that an American could become a duke since that is
> >> forbidden in the Constitution.>>
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:35:14 -0500
> From:    Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> Nancy Gish - Women's Studies wrote:
> >
> >  They could not,
> > for example, rule that an American could become a duke since that
> > is forbidden in the Constitution.  They could not rule that
> > Schwarzenegger could run for president, since he is not a natural
> > born citizen.  It would require an amendment.  They can only do
> > what the Constitution allows.
>
> It's worth considering what (altering the phrase Wellek used for a
> chapter title) is the ontological status of The Constitution. It is a
> text, and as writers from almost all perspectives have argued, a text in
> itself has no meaning: that is, it has meaning only as it is construed
> by a reader. After all, Milton argued vigorously and at length that
> statements in the NT condemning divorce actually approved divorce. And
> the Supreme Court has been ruling for about a century and a quarter that
> certain 'entities' that do not breathe, eat, couple, defecate are
> nevertheless persons under the protection of the 14th amendment.
>
> A Court that treats Corporations as persons surely could just as easily
> approve of Dukedoms for u.s. citizens or define "naturalized citizen" as
> "native-born citizen."
>
> In fact, unless there is a really major political shift in the next few
> years it is almost certain that the Court will rule that "born in the
> U.S." does _not_ mean "born in the U.S." for those with grandparents
> from the Mideast.
>
> Carrol
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:39:38 -0700
> From:    Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> I should have added that this doctrine goes by the
> name of 'human security.' It main tenet is that
> international politics should not concentrate on the
> affairs of state but on the security of the person. I
> ahve also heard it called 'soft power.'
>
>
> --- Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > --- Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > ... What right
> > > does any nation have to dictate the internal
> > affairs
> > > (including weapons
> > > program) of any other sovereign nation?
> >
> > By the right of any institution that wishes to
> > protect
> > the world from a great evil. Respect for
> > sovereignity
> > does not have to extend to the acceptance of either
> > internal or external atrocities. This has been
> > accepted by the iinternational community in the
> > cases
> > of the former Yugoslavia and Somalia.
> >
> > The only argument now concerns the insititution that
> > is capable of authorizing such action. Some make the
> > case that this can only be the United Nations.
> > However
> > since the UN was not able to make a decision in
> > Yugoslaia because of the opposition of Russia and
> > China to any action, NATO (i.e. the US) decided to
> > take action unilaterally in Kosovo. This  led to the
> > incident of the stand off between Russian and
> > British
> > troops for control of an airport there.
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product
> > search
> > http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 17:25:37 -0400
> From:    William Gray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWM a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> --=_9EC028CD.4F2E729F
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Tom,
>     As far as I am familiar with McLuhan (also some reading from a few =
> years back), hot media were encourage passive reception because they are
> = so high definition, and cool were those that required audience
> participatio= n. I am unfamiliar with the distinctives you gave.=20
>     According to the descriptions I remember, I would classify TWL as a
> = cool medium. Structure of juxtaposition, like that of zeugma in the
> 18th = century, requires audience participation in order to function. I
> have a = suspicion Eliot would want the poem classified both ways -- as a
> hot = medium because "genuine poetry can communcate before it is
> understood" and = as a cool medium because he _knows_ you didn't get it
> all the first = time.=20
>    Interesting question, Tom!
> =20
> Cheers,
> Will
> =20
> PS -- By the way, great last name!
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 10/08/03 08:51AM >>>
> The premier issue of a new magazine in Canada contans
> a review by Lewis Lapham of a new book on Marshall
> Mcluhan (what else do you expect in Canada?)
>
> Lapham, among other things, made the point that
> Mcluhan worte his books to give people  methods to
> resist the developments in society being driven by
> electronic technology. Mcluhan was a conservative who
> wished to preserve an older way of dealing with the
> world. He was a great admirer of the work of TSE.
>
> This brings up an issue which has puzzled me and
> perhaps someone in the group can provide me with some
> insight.
>
> Mcluhan distinguised between cool and hot media. Hot
> media tends to indvidual study and opinion and
> interpretation with direct arguments. Cool media is
> holistic. Its arguments come from collective social
> images and interpretation is done collectively by
> communities. Its arguments are highly non-linear. At
> least this is how I interpreted the terms hot and cool
> from my long ago reading of Mcluhan.
>
> By my interpretation of Mcluhan at least, TWL is a
> cool poem. Its arguments are not linear but exist
> holisitcally in images that repeat throughout the
> poem. It is not a poem that will surrender to the
> individual study that a hot medium encourages. Its
> interpretation can only be a collective enterprise
> with opinions being held and shaped collectively.
>
> I suppose my question is if there is any merit in this
> idea. IS TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan? If
> so, then why did TSE hold an attraction for someone
> who objected to the creation of cool media?
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> http://shopping.yahoo.com=20
>
>
>
> --=_9EC028CD.4F2E729F
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html;
> charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
> >
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY
> style=3D"MARGIN-TOP: 2px; FONT: 12pt Garamond; MARGIN-LEFT: 2px">
> <DIV>Tom,</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; As far as I am familiar with
> McLuhan (also some = reading=20 from a few years back), hot media were
> encourage passive reception because = they=20 are so high definition, and
> cool were those that required audience=20 participation. I am unfamiliar
> with the distinctives you gave. </DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; According
> to the descriptions I remember, I = would=20 classify TWL as a cool
> medium. Structure of juxtaposition, like that of = zeugma=20 in the 18th
> century, requires audience participation in order to function. = I=20
> have a suspicion Eliot would want the poem classified both ways -- as a =
> hot=20 medium because "genuine poetry can communcate before it is
> understood" and = as a=20 cool medium because he _knows_ you didn't get
> it all the first time. = </DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp; Interesting question,
> Tom!</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Cheers,</DIV> <DIV>Will</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>PS -- By the way, great last
> name!<BR><BR>&gt;&gt;&gt;=20 [log in to unmask] 10/08/03 08:51AM
> &gt;&gt;&gt;<BR>The premier issue = of a=20 new magazine in Canada
> contans<BR>a review by Lewis Lapham of a new book = on=20
> Marshall<BR>Mcluhan (what else do you expect in Canada?)<BR><BR>Lapham, =
> among=20 other things, made the point that<BR>Mcluhan worte his books to
> give=20 people&nbsp; methods to<BR>resist the developments in society
> being = driven=20 by<BR>electronic technology. Mcluhan was a conservative
> who<BR>wished = to=20 preserve an older way of dealing with the<BR>world.
> He was a great admirer = of=20 the work of TSE.<BR><BR>This brings up an
> issue which has puzzled me=20 and<BR>perhaps someone in the group can
> provide me with=20 some<BR>insight.<BR><BR>Mcluhan distinguised between
> cool and hot = media.=20 Hot<BR>media tends to indvidual study and
> opinion and<BR>interpretation = with=20 direct arguments. Cool media
> is<BR>holistic. Its arguments come from = collective=20 social<BR>images
> and interpretation is done collectively by<BR>communities.=
>  Its=20 arguments are highly non-linear. At<BR>least this is how I
> interpreted the = terms=20 hot and cool<BR>from my long ago reading of
> Mcluhan.<BR><BR>By my = interpretation=20 of Mcluhan at least, TWL is
> a<BR>cool poem. Its arguments are not linear = but=20
> exist<BR>holisitcally in images that repeat throughout the<BR>poem. It is
> = not a=20 poem that will surrender to the<BR>individual study that a hot
> medium=20 encourages. Its<BR>interpretation can only be a collective
> enterprise<BR>wi= th=20 opinions being held and shaped
> collectively.<BR><BR>I suppose my question = is if=20 there is any merit
> in this<BR>idea. IS TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense = of=20 Mcluhan?
> If<BR>so, then why did TSE hold an attraction for someone<BR>who= =20
> objected to the creation of cool=20
> media?<BR><BR>__________________________________<BR>Do you Yahoo!?<BR>The
> = New=20 Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search<BR><A=20
> href=3D"http://shopping.yahoo.com/">http://shopping.yahoo.com</A><BR></DIV>=
> </BODY></HTML>
>
> --=_9EC028CD.4F2E729F--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:18:34 -0700
> From:    Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: T.E. vs D.H.
>
> No responses except yours, so far.
> Thanks very much. If there is a clear, traceable
> connection I would be very much interested.
> Thanks again,
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Dillane [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 5:08 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: T.E. vs D.H.
>
>
> I don't get to this machine often - has anyone run with this? I think I
> may have seen something tangential to some other account suggesting this.
> One of the recent TEL biographies has pursued his mother's background and
> changed the story a bit. I will have to chase that if it is still of
> interest to you - might take a day 'cause no books to hand. The old
> account was that Sarah Lawrence was the illegitimate daughter of John
> Lawrence a ship builder and of course as Peter O"Toole told us (in the
> same breathless way he anticipated Gordon Liddy that the trick is not to
> care about pain) the old man was Sir Thomas Chapman. "He wasn't married
> to my mother.
>
> Cheers Pete
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 10:49 AM
> Subject: T.E. vs D.H.
>
>
> > Somewhere along the line I heard, learned, was taught
> > or otherwise imbibed the so-called information that
> > T.E. Lawrence AND D.H. Lawrence were distantly related.
> > So far neither I nor my incredibly knowledgeable internet
> > buddy/guru have been able to ascertain anything to back
> > that possibility up.
> >
> > Anyone know anything about it?
> >
> > Thanks muchly for your time and patience,
> > Peter
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 18:35:59 EDT
> From:    Kate Troy <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> --part1_1ef.111451f8.2cb5eb4f_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> In a message dated 10/8/2003 12:31:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
>
> >
> > In fact, unless there is a really major political shift in the next few
> > years it is almost certain that the Court will rule that "born in the
> > U.S." does _not_ mean "born in the U.S." for those with grandparents
> > from the Mideast.
> >
>
> Yes, Carrol, let's just let every young Arab man who wants to come into
> this country come in, no questions asked.
>
> --part1_1ef.111451f8.2cb5eb4f_boundary
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"
> FACE= =3D"Verdana" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 10/8/2003 12:31:03 PM
> Eastern Day= light Time, [log in to unmask] writes:<BR> <BR> </FONT><FONT
> COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=
>  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE
> TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
> : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>
> In fact, unless there is a really major political shift in the next
> few<BR> years it is almost certain that the Court will rule that "born in
> the<BR> U.S." does _not_ mean "born in the U.S." for those with
> grandparents<BR> from the Mideast.<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> </FONT><FONT
> COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=
>  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Verdana" LANG=3D"0"><BR> Yes, Carrol,
> let's just let every young Arab man who wants to come into this=
>  country come in, no questions asked.</FONT></HTML>
>
> --part1_1ef.111451f8.2cb5eb4f_boundary--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 18:37:57 EDT
> From:    Kate Troy <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: OT or OT? politics/Bush, et.al.
>
> --part1_172.20b9e19e.2cb5ebc5_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> In a message dated 10/8/2003 12:31:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
>
> > In fact, unless there is a really major political shift in the next few
> > years it is almost certain that the Court will rule that "born in the
> > U.S." does _not_ mean "born in the U.S." for those with grandparents
> > from the Mideast.
> >
> >
>
> Are you saying that Americans with grandparents born in Israel will not be
> considered U.S. citizens?  That's difficult to believe.
>
> --part1_172.20b9e19e.2cb5ebc5_boundary
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"
> FACE= =3D"Verdana" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 10/8/2003 12:31:03 PM
> Eastern Day= light Time, [log in to unmask] writes:<BR> <BR> </FONT><FONT
> COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=
>  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE
> TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
> : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">In fact, unless there is a
> : real=
> ly major political shift in the next few<BR> years it is almost certain
> that the Court will rule that "born in the<BR> U.S." does _not_ mean
> "born in the U.S." for those with grandparents<BR> from the Mideast.<BR>
> <BR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000"
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=
>  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Verdana" LANG=3D"0"><BR> Are you saying
> that Americans with grandparents born in Israel will not be c= onsidered
> U.S. citizens?&nbsp; That's difficult to believe.</FONT></HTML>
>
> --part1_172.20b9e19e.2cb5ebc5_boundary--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 18:48:45 -0400
> From:    Marcia Karp <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> William Gray wrote:
>
> >    According to the descriptions I remember, I would classify TWL as a
> > cool medium. Structure of juxtaposition, like that of zeugma in the
> > 18th century, requires audience participation in order to function.
> >
> >
> Dear Will,
>     I know zeugma as a rhetorical structure (and cool word). It is one
> of a seeming infinity of juxtapositions. But I don't know anything about
> the 18th-century use that requires audience participation. Tell all.
>
> Thanks,
> Marcia
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 18:37:43 -0500
> From:    Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> Marcia Karp wrote:
> >
> > William Gray wrote:
> >
> > >    According to the descriptions I remember, I would classify TWL as
> > > a cool medium. Structure of juxtaposition, like that of zeugma in the
> > > 18th century, requires audience participation in order to function.
> > >
> > >
> > Dear Will,
> >     I know zeugma as a rhetorical structure (and cool word). It is one
> > of a seeming infinity of juxtapositions. But I don't know anything
> > about the 18th-century use that requires audience participation. Tell
> > all.
> >
>
> "Sometimes counsel take, and sometimes tea." The reader has to supply
> the 'other' meaning of "take."
>
> I don't know whether this should really be called "audience
> participation" though. McLuhan has some interesting observations on the
> _Dunciad_ in _The Gutenberg Galaxy_ -- but I can't remember what they
> were. :-)
>
> Carrol
>
>
> > Thanks,
> > Marcia
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 19:43:41 -0400
> From:    Marcia Karp <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >"Sometimes counsel take, and sometimes tea." The reader has to supply
> >the 'other' meaning of "take."
> >
> >I don't know whether this should really be called "audience
> >participation" though.
> >
>
>
>
> Dear Carrol,
>     I understand that, but doesn't the reader have to notice, for
> example, enjambment and _supply_ the correct sort of pause or holding up
> of the line.  I don't see zeugma as special in that regard.  Like you, I
> am not sure about "audience participation," though I think I take its
> meaning.  But I do wonder if Will has something else in mind?  Was it,
> perhaps, a figure that was written about by 18th writers in a special
> way?  Youth wants to know and so do I.
>
> Thanks,
> Marcia
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 19:49:01 EDT
> From:    Kate Troy <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> --part1_15f.26a9b8c1.2cb5fc6d_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>
> In a message dated 10/8/2003 6:50:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
>
> > I know zeugma as a rhetorical structure (and cool word). It is one of
> > a seeming infinity of juxtapositions. But I don't know anything about
> > the 18th-century use that requires audience participation. Tell all.
> >
> >
>
> I was actually thinking of the Waste Land in terms of transporting it
> into another media. The Waste Land, in fact, does contain sufficient
> conversational interludes and is such a moody piece that a skilled and
> inspired screenwriter may in fact be able to come up with something. I
> picture a "Bergman" like movie, but that wouldn't do these days. Perhaps
> film noir. Game one tonight: Red Sox and Yankees. For those of you who do
> not live in nor were raised in New England, Massachusetts in particular,
> please forgive these sporadic updates. I'm afraid that I cannot contain
> my enthusiasm.
>
> Regards,
>
> Kate
>
> --part1_15f.26a9b8c1.2cb5fc6d_boundary
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"
> FACE= =3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000"
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=
>  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Verdana" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated
> 10/8/20= 03 6:50:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [log in to unmask]
> writes:<BR> <BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000"
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=
>  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE
> TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
> : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I know zeugma as a
> : rhetorical s=
> tructure (and cool word).&nbsp; It is one<BR> of a seeming infinity of
> juxtapositions.&nbsp; But I don't know anything<BR> about the
> 18th-century use that requires audience participation.&nbsp; Tell=20=
> all.<BR> <BR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000"
> style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=
>  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Verdana" LANG=3D"0"><BR> I was actually
> thinking of the Waste Land in terms of transporting it into a= nother
> media.&nbsp; The Waste Land, in fact, does contain sufficient convers=
> ational interludes and is such a moody piece that a skilled and inspired
> scr= eenwriter may in fact be able to come up with something.&nbsp; I
> picture a "= Bergman" like movie, but that wouldn't do these days.&nbsp;
> Perhaps film noi= r.&nbsp; Game one tonight: Red Sox and Yankees.&nbsp;
> For those of you who d= o not live in nor were raised in New England,
> Massachusetts in particular, p= lease forgive these sporadic
> updates.&nbsp; I'm afraid that I cannot contain=
>  my enthusiasm.<BR> <BR> Regards,<BR> <BR> Kate</FONT><FONT
> COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE= =3D3
> FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Verdana" LANG=3D"0">=20 </FONT></HTML>
> --part1_15f.26a9b8c1.2cb5fc6d_boundary--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 18:17:43 -0700
> From:    Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWM a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> Hot and Cool have to do with perception.
> A consistent thread in McLuhan's work since his thesis
> on Thomas Nash and the breakdown of medieval education
> is the effect of media on perception.
>
> Some media present a complete perceptual package.
> Others present key pointers and leave the reader
> to fill in the rest, much as digital video does today.
>
> The total package is HOT because it's all there.
> The key pointer package is cool because of all the
>   spaces for the receiver to fill in. Jazz syncopation
>   is an example.
>
> The dominant media have social effects partially through
> the perceptual conditioning they effect.
>
> Mac saw radio in WWII as hot, esp. Hitler's use of it
>   (he had a lot of rhetorical training). It presented
>   the reader with a perceptual package which was so
>   full that it overloaded perception and created hysteria.
>
> Mac saw TV as cool because the TV screen conditoned visual
>   perception to be linear (the way the ear takes in sound)
>   and interpretive (ie. filling in all the spaces between
>   the dots on the screen to create the full internal percept).
>   That high brain activity had a soporific and cooling down effect.
>   It absorbed energy, rather than radiating it.
>
> There are at least two schools of McLuhan interest:
>    those who try to continue his work, and
>    those who think he wouldn't want such continuation
>       but rather would encourage new creative understandings.
> The former are called McLuhanists by the latter, and the latter
> are ignored by the former (so let us call the latter anti-McLuhanists).
> The latest book would seem to emmenate from the anti-McLuhanists.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Gray [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 5:52 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Is TWM a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
>
> The premier issue of a new magazine in Canada contans
> a review by Lewis Lapham of a new book on Marshall
> Mcluhan (what else do you expect in Canada?)
>
> Lapham, among other things, made the point that
> Mcluhan worte his books to give people  methods to
> resist the developments in society being driven by
> electronic technology. Mcluhan was a conservative who
> wished to preserve an older way of dealing with the
> world. He was a great admirer of the work of TSE.
>
> This brings up an issue which has puzzled me and
> perhaps someone in the group can provide me with some
> insight.
>
> Mcluhan distinguised between cool and hot media. Hot
> media tends to indvidual study and opinion and
> interpretation with direct arguments. Cool media is
> holistic. Its arguments come from collective social
> images and interpretation is done collectively by
> communities. Its arguments are highly non-linear. At
> least this is how I interpreted the terms hot and cool
> from my long ago reading of Mcluhan.
>
> By my interpretation of Mcluhan at least, TWL is a
> cool poem. Its arguments are not linear but exist
> holisitcally in images that repeat throughout the
> poem. It is not a poem that will surrender to the
> individual study that a hot medium encourages. Its
> interpretation can only be a collective enterprise
> with opinions being held and shaped collectively.
>
> I suppose my question is if there is any merit in this
> idea. IS TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan? If
> so, then why did TSE hold an attraction for someone
> who objected to the creation of cool media?
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:30:09 -0400
> From:    William Gray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> --=_4816FE21.AACB976E
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Marcia,
> =20
>     Perhaps this is just a matter of perspective. I'll use one of the
> more = familiar examples of zeugma, from Pope's Rape of the Lock: =20
> This Day, black Omens threat the brightest Fair That e'er deserv'd a
> watchful Spirit's Care; Some dire Disaster, or by Force, or Slight, But
> what, or where, the Fates have wrapt in Night. Whether the Nymph shall
> break Diana's Law, Or some frail China Jar receive a Flaw, Or stain her
> Honour, or her new Brocade, Forget her Pray'rs, or miss a Masquerade, Or
> lose her Heart, or Necklace, at a Ball; Or whether Heav'n has doom'd that
> Shock must fall.
>
> Pope uses zeugma in a couple places here, most obviously with "stain" in
> = the 7th line here, and "lose" in the 9th. Since zeugma uses more than
> one = sense of a word, it takes an active reader to realize it, just like
> with a = pun. The reader or listener's imagination must be actively
> "creative", not = relatively passive like it could be with most of the
> other lines here. The = sense is not straightforward -- so it requires an
> audience to untangle it, = just as it required Pope to tangle it in the
> first place.
>      I would suggest the same activity is necessary in reading TWL. The
> = following two lines are perfectly understandable on their own, since
> they = are both in English: =20 Shall I at least set my lands in order?
> London Bridge is falling down falling down falling down =20 However, when
> the lines are put together, a new meaning is created, and = the reader
> must try to understand their connection. Hope this helps. =20 Cheers,
> Will
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 10/08/03 06:48PM >>>
> William Gray wrote:
>
> >    According to the descriptions I remember, I would classify TWL as a =
> cool medium. Structure of juxtaposition, like that of zeugma in the 18th =
> century, requires audience participation in order to function.
> >
> >
> Dear Will,
>     I know zeugma as a rhetorical structure (and cool word).  It is one
> of a seeming infinity of juxtapositions.  But I don't know anything
> about the 18th-century use that requires audience participation.  Tell =
> all.
>
> Thanks,
> Marcia
>
>
>
> --=_4816FE21.AACB976E
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html;
> charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
> >
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY
> style=3D"MARGIN-TOP: 2px; FONT: 12pt Garamond; MARGIN-LEFT: 2px">
> <DIV>Marcia,</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Perhaps this
> is just a matter of perspective. I'll = use=20 one of the more familiar
> examples of zeugma, from Pope's <EM>Rape of = the=20 Lock:</EM></DIV>
> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>This Day, black Omens threat the
> brightest Fair<BR>That e'er deserv'd = a=20 watchful Spirit's
> Care;<BR>Some dire Disaster, or by Force, or Slight,<BR>B= ut=20 what, or
> where, the Fates have wrapt in Night.<BR>Whether the Nymph shall =
> break=20 <I>Diana</I>'s Law,<BR>Or some frail <I>China</I> Jar receive a
> Flaw,<BR>Or= =20 stain her Honour, or her new Brocade,<BR>Forget her
> Pray'rs, or miss a=20 Masquerade,<BR>Or lose her Heart, or Necklace, at a
> Ball;<BR>Or whether = Heav'n=20 has doom'd that <I>Shock</I> must
> fall.<BR></DIV> <DIV>Pope uses zeugma in a couple places here, most
> obviously with "stain" = in=20 the 7th line here, and "lose" in the 9th.
> Since zeugma uses more than one = sense=20 of a word, it takes&nbsp;an
> active&nbsp;reader to realize it, just like = with a=20 pun. The reader
> or listener's imagination must be actively "creative", = not=20
> relatively passive like it could be with most of the other lines here.
> The = sense=20 is not straightforward -- so it requires an audience to
> untangle it, just = as it=20 required Pope to tangle it in the first
> place.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I would suggest the same
> activity is = necessary in=20 reading TWL. The following two lines are
> perfectly understandable on their = own,=20 since they are both in
> English:</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Shall I at least set my lands in
> order?</DIV> <DIV>London Bridge is falling down falling down falling
> down</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>However, when the lines are put
> together, a new meaning is created, = and the=20 reader must try to
> understand their connection. Hope this helps.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>Cheers,</DIV> <DIV>Will</DIV> <DIV><BR>&gt;&gt;&gt;
> [log in to unmask] 10/08/03 06:48PM=20 &gt;&gt;&gt;<BR>William Gray
> wrote:<BR><BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; = According to=20 the descriptions I
> remember, I would classify TWL as a cool medium. = Structure of=20
> juxtaposition, like that of zeugma in the 18th century, requires =
> audience=20 participation in order to
> function.<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;<BR>Dear=20 Will,<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I know
> zeugma as a rhetorical structure (and = cool=20 word).&nbsp; It is
> one<BR>of a seeming infinity of juxtapositions.&nbsp; = But I=20 don't
> know anything<BR>about the 18th-century use that requires audience=20=
>
> participation.&nbsp; Tell
> all.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR>Marcia<BR></DIV></BODY></H= TML>
>
> --=_4816FE21.AACB976E--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:41:42 -0400
> From:    William Gray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWL a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> --=_98C62EF7.B6D78B73
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Marcia,
>     I wish I knew more.=20
>     I agree with Carrol, I don't know whether you can really call it =
> "audience participation," but it is significant -- and different, I
> think, = then interpreting enjambment. For instance, it is a dramatic
> convention = for the audience to imagine a fourth wall to indoor sets,
> but it is a far = different thing for them to reconcile contradictory
> statements made by an = actor. To me, zeugma, juxtaposition, etc. seemed
> to be literary equivalents=
>  to the interpretive perception McLuhan talked about with regard to TV. =
> For what it's worth...
> =20
> Cheers,
> Will
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 10/08/03 07:43PM >>>
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >"Sometimes counsel take, and sometimes tea." The reader has to supply
> >the 'other' meaning of "take."
> >
> >I don't know whether this should really be called "audience
> >participation" though.
> >
>
>
>
> Dear Carrol,
>     I understand that, but doesn't the reader have to notice, for
> example, enjambment and _supply_ the correct sort of pause or holding up
> of the line.  I don't see zeugma as special in that regard.  Like you, I
> am not sure about "audience participation," though I think I take its
> meaning.  But I do wonder if Will has something else in mind?  Was it,
> perhaps, a figure that was written about by 18th writers in a special
> way?  Youth wants to know and so do I.
>
> Thanks,
> Marcia
>
>
>
> --=_98C62EF7.B6D78B73
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html;
> charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
> >
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY
> style=3D"MARGIN-TOP: 2px; FONT: 12pt Garamond; MARGIN-LEFT: 2px">
> <DIV>Marcia,</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I wish I knew more. </DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I agree with Carrol, I don't know whether you can
> = really=20 call it "audience participation," but it is significant --
> and different, = I=20 think, then interpreting enjambment. For instance,
> it is a dramatic = convention=20 for the audience to imagine a fourth
> wall to&nbsp;indoor sets, but it is a = far=20 different thing for them
> to reconcile contradictory statements made by an = actor.=20 To me,
> zeugma, juxtaposition, etc. seemed to be literary equivalents to = the=20
> interpretive perception McLuhan talked about with regard to TV. For what
> = it's=20 worth...</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Cheers,</DIV>
> <DIV>Will<BR><BR>&gt;&gt;&gt; [log in to unmask] 10/08/03 07:43PM=20
> &gt;&gt;&gt;<BR>Carrol Cox wrote:<BR><BR>&gt;"Sometimes counsel take, =
> and=20 sometimes tea." The reader has to supply<BR>&gt;the 'other'
> meaning of=20 "take."<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;I don't know whether this should
> really be = called=20 "audience<BR>&gt;participation"
> though.<BR>&gt;<BR><BR><BR><BR>Dear=20 Carrol,<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I
> understand that, but doesn't the reader = have to=20 notice,
> for<BR>example, enjambment and _supply_ the correct sort of pause = or=20
> holding up<BR>of the line.&nbsp; I don't see zeugma as special in that=20
> regard.&nbsp; Like you, I<BR>am not sure about "audience participation,"
> = though=20 I think I take its<BR>meaning.&nbsp; But I do wonder if Will
> has something = else=20 in mind?&nbsp; Was it,<BR>perhaps, a figure that
> was written about by = 18th=20 writers in a special<BR>way?&nbsp; Youth
> wants to know and so do=20
> I.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR>Marcia<BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
> --=_98C62EF7.B6D78B73--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Wed, 8 Oct 2003 20:51:10 -0500
> From:    Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Is TWM a 'cool' poem in the sense of Mcluhan?
>
> Peter Montgomery wrote:
> >
> > Hot and Cool have to do with perception.
> > A consistent thread in McLuhan's work since his thesis
> > on Thomas Nash and the breakdown of medieval education
> > is the effect of media on perception.
> >
> > Some media present a complete perceptual package.
> > Others present key pointers and leave the reader
> > t
>
> Thanks, I'd been wracking my brains to remember something of the books
> I'd read about 40 years ago. You don't mention (and I can't remember)
> whether he classified print as hot or cool -- I would assume cool.
> (Print leaves much to the reader's imaging powers.) But in any case, one
> can't speak of a given text as either cool or hot, because that depends
> _not_ on the content of the text but on the fact that it is a text
> rather than a speech or a gesture or a movie.
>
> But that isn't right either -- because now I remember that manuscript
> and print are different media, but I can't remember which is hot and
> which is coool.
>
> Carrol
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of TSE Digest - 7 Oct 2003 to 8 Oct 2003 (#2003-229)
> ********************************************************
>