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?
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Connect now!