Print

Print


Carrol, I don't understand your point either. Pound changed his ideas about poetry. Imagism depends on a red wheelbarrow next to white chickens; it is rather but not absolutely impersonal and unemotional. Call it Vorticism or not, his later style breaks those rules. If I find that interesting and you don't, why is that a problem? Diana> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:52:11 -0600> From: [log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: War and Justice> To: [log in to unmask]> > Diana Manister wrote:> > > > Carrol, someone riding in an elevator would not be interested in> > information about the engineering that makes it work. A visitor to the> > Empire State Building would probably not be interested in learning> > about reinforced concrete or how Art Deco differs from Bauhaus> > architecture. Builders of elevators, skyscrapers or poems need certain> > kinds of information that end-users of those things do not.> > > > Intellectual knowledge is only one tool -- it does not replace talent> > or intuition, but it is useful.> > I agree with all this, but I don't understand your point. And what as it> to do with Pound's casual and passing use of a couple slogans, and the> relationship of those slogans to anything?> > Carrol
_________________________________________________________________
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/connect.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_newways_112007