On the other hand maybe you just made the mistake of being positive by giving someone a compliment. Being critical is much more the mode de riguer. ;->
----- Original Message -----
From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">Diana Manister
To: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 5:36 AM
Subject: Re: The ivory men

Nancy what can I do to make my implied relative clause more explicit? I thought it was clear that by "we" I meant those to whose speculations Carrol objected. I regret not having said that in my original message, but I did explain my meaning in the message below. "We" can be a perfectly good, non-privileging word when it refers to a group with a common, though no more worthwhile agenda than another person's or group's.

No disrespect was intended. If anything, my objections were to what I perceived as the overly controlling proscriptions of a member of the list's established authority to a few upstarts' imaginative speculations.

I apologize for the lack of precision in my statement. Diana


I objected--and still do--to the "We who are struggling. . . . If you
don't like what we do. . . ."  It says--whether intennded or not--that
there is a "we" who are central here and he can like it or leave.  You
did not say "We who employ speculation"; you said "We who are struggling
to understand," as if that did not include others.   I'm not addressing
what you do or like or believe:  I'm addressing the assumptions in that
reaction to Carrol.

Nancy, if some of us find it helpful to veer off into speculations about
what elements in Eliot's work might mean, I think it is our right to
employ that method. Eliot freed his imagination, and if some of our
associations are arbitrary and wrong-headed, well that is the price paid
for thinking outside the box. I offer my "take" on his words in order to
get more information. I often change my interpretation after being
corrected by other listers, which is one of the benefits of such a list.
Why carry around some misguided idea about what Eliot meant, when I can
expose my belief to the list and be either reinforced or disabused of
it? I don't offer my interpretations as correct; I'm asking what others

No one owns this list, as far as I know. By "we" I meant those of us
employing the speculative method to which Carrol objected. His remarks
addressed an approach to Eliot's work that he found undocumentable; my
remarks addressed his approach to our approach. Neither of our
criticisms were ad hominum.  Diana


>>> Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]> 07/01/07 10:25 AM >>>

Picture this share your photos and you could win big!

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/884 - Release Date: 7/2/2007 3:35 PM