Good heavens. Has the idea of loving something so much as
to let  go of it, disappeared?
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Marcia Karp 
  To: [log in to unmask] 
  Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:11 PM
  Subject: From Little Gidding, Was: Eliotists

  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 suggest:

  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, indifference 
  Which resembles the others as death resembles life, 
  Being between two lives---unflowering, between 
  The live and the dead nettle. 
  <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
  <!--[endif]-->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.


  Laura Close:

    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: 
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.


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG. 
  Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1387 - Release Date: 4/19/2008 11:31 AM