Print

Print


I didn't say you didn't read it, and really my response was to all who 
have been posting on this thread. What makes you think I'm singling you 
out? When you read it, did you understand it?

Nancy Gish wrote:
> What makes you think I didn't read it--indeed, have to read it?  I 
> don't think it is that useful, but I admit I read it--and lots of 
> criticism based in philosophy--quite a long while ago, but I never 
> found it as revealing as, for example, /The Varieties of Metaphysical 
> Poetry/ and the many articles he wrote well after the dissertation.  
> And I think I already agreed that it was also about culture, not only 
> individual. 
    Again, Carrol and CR both posted on different uses of the word.
> On the other hand, there is no "the" context: there are contexts.
  I didn't say there was. You're really hung up on that, aren't you? How 
do you know there is no "the" context?

 Ken A