I'm off for the day, but just a quick reply.

I don't have difficulty with the artist's well-developed intuition.  
What I think we differ on is how much the artist is thinking about his 


Diana Manister wrote:

> Marcia, I wish I could have been clearer about my understanding of 
> intuition's role in poetry. I've been influenced by many commentators 
> on the subject, as well as by my own experiences as a painter and 
> poet. You may want to look at some of the literature on the subject, 
> if you haven't already:
> Creative Intuition in Art and Poetry by Maritain, Jacques, 1882-1973. 
> [pub. c1953] In addition, many books and articles have 
> been written about Maritain's ideas.
> And also, an appreciation of the intuitive element involved in reading 
> and writing poetry is described by William Empson in his Seven Types 
> of Ambiguity. Empson was an infamous sorehead and crank, who attacked 
> pedantry and an overly rational approach to poetry, to wit:
> From Wikipedia: "Empson's distaste for New Criticism could manifest 
> itself in his distinctive dismissive and brusque wit as when he 
> describes New Criticism 
> <>, ironically 
> referring to it as "the new rigour", as a "campaign to make poetry as 
> dull as possible."
> Cheers, Diana
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     From: Marcia Karp <[log in to unmask]>
>     Reply-To: "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
>     To: [log in to unmask]
>     Subject: Re: Here is no prophet and no great matter
>     Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:05:41 -0500
>     Thanks, Diana, for greatly clarifying things. 
>     I see those things differently than you do, but now I understand
>     what you are saying, and am glad for that.
>     Best,
>     Marcia
>     Diana Manister wrote:
>         Peter and Marcia,
>         We'll never know exactly how Eliot pictured his audience, but
>         my admittedly exaggerated assertion that he could anticipate
>         their every association to his verbal figures was based on the
>         likelihood that he was addressing a cultured and/or educated
>         gentry, in short, an elite who shared similar experiences,
>         privileges and prejudices in England at that time. Certainly
>         when the work is read in a later historical period and in a
>         different country with a less rigid class system, those
>         associations will broaden beyond what Eliot could anticipate.
>         Abstract art probably does not suffer the same contingency --
>         a Rothko painting will likely communicate the same
>         contemplative feeling-tone in more circumstances than an
>         artwork fashionned from words, whose meanings change more
>         swiftly than the significations of colors do. (Pop art I think
>         will change meaning in different contexts -- a Jaspar Johns
>         American flag or a silk-screen of Marilyn Monroe say.)
>         <>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> With tax season right around the corner, make sure to follow these few 
> simple tips. <>