"And perhaps there was a foetal characteristic (ie undeveloped)in the mindset involved.It;s meant to be a put-down of some intensity.P".----- Original Message -----From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">Chokh RajSent: Saturday, March 01, 2008 1:16 PMSubject: Re: On the Making of a SimileDiana, the observations you've made so far are quite apropos.Nevertheless, I hope, your initial objection to an irresponsible foetus is over.As for the image of a foetus laughing, one will have to concede that it is plainabsurd, even if quite fanciful -- but not quite as reprehensible.Presumably, the poet might have been struck by a foetal look on the face ofMr Apollinax (BR) laughing irresponsibly ;-) The image has no literal validityotherwise.Regards,CR
----- Original Message ----
From: Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Saturday, March 1, 2008 9:04:57 AM
Subject: Re: On the Making of a Simile
//Peter, yes babies in bottles were around in Eliot's day, but I doubt very much if any of them would be laughing, irresponsibly or not.// Diana
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.4/1309 - Release Date: 3/3/2008 6:50 PM