Empty of content, yes, without the contexts Carrol notes are missing.
Look again at the snipped-its as they appear in the poem. The first
quotation not only follows the second in the poem, it is "love of a
country." The second does not detach detachment from attachment in the
way that the quoting of it and transformative imagination
There are three conditions
which often look alike
Yet differ completely, flourish in the same hedgerow:
Attachment to self and to things and to persons, detachment
From self and from things and from persons; and, growing between them,
Which resembles the others as death resembles life,
Being between two lives---unflowering, between
The live and the dead nettle.
I don't know what the it is that is
lovely. Nor do I know whose imagination has transformed what. Please
say more, Laura, to help me follow your thinking.
What do you think of "Thus the love of country
begins as an attachment
to our own field of action" and "detachement from self and from things
and from persons" ? Lovely ideas, lovely isn't it....
This is what I link to transformative imagination
Carrol Cox wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
Laura Close wrote:
What do you think of "Thus the love of country begins as an attachment
to our own field of action"
Precisely what does this mean? Does it just assume that "attachment to
country" is a good thing; or is it in a context in which such attachment
is a bad thing? It seems quite empty of content to me.