Print

Print




On 6/3/2016 6:16 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
No one has ever succeeded in defining Poetry, 
     I love a grand unprovable generalization as much as the next person, though if we were going to argue, you'd have to start with a definition of "success." But you needn't bother on my account. I'd only point out that the author of the paper which elicited my query seems to think there IS a difference, and upon which she can presumably explain one (over here) in terms of the other (over there). I would just like to see it, and judging by her vita, which to be sure is quite impressive, there's a good chance "vagueness" is going to work into it somewhere (everywhere?).

 On the oddest of U.S. election seasons I've witnessed and despite my general rule not to talk politics on the listserv, this season is so downright and outright big-time weird and the emerging candidates so unattractive and the stakes so high, I've entertained the same thought you have. (Don't worry, probably for different reasons.) I imagine many of us have had the thought that, speaking of novelizations, this real life adventure is a satirical parody of itself that needs no third party author. Just clip the daily newspaper articles, paste them in a large scrapbook, and watch the story grow.

Just sayin'...
Ken A
   
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
let alone given any meaning to  what is "ineluctably poetry." The poetry/prose distinction is a social   construct, not some Platonic essence. If we agree to name a text a poem, it is a poem. And if you read serious histories of "the novel," you find that there is very little agreement as to when "the novel" was invented. I would say that As I Lay Dying is as " ineluctably" poetic as TWL. 

But there are more fun things to argue about. Is Clinton or Trump the most serious threat to the world? It's a close call, but I suspect Clinton would be the more effective evil.