Pound vs. Eliot

[jdeirmend]

then if you don't know them from an objective stand, you simply don't know them

and you knew who i was talking to :J:

basically you don't know, them from their poetry. you only think you do.

i love how you reply to everything i said after telling me it was intelligible
but that's nothing to do with the topic at hand. you said you know or get something about the writer from reading their poetry.
you tell me of all your sources but i see none. i can prove my point as valid because you state

But your "pointed" question is entirely besides the point. I'm not concerned with whether or not I can "objectively know" someone by reading their literature. I'm not concerned because I never claimed to be able to do this, and everything I stand for tells me that it is impossible to "objectively know" anyone, period, through any means, in any robust sense.

We piece clues together, rather, from the scraps they throw us. Our own imaginations help us to fill in the gaps. We have conjectures, speculations, inferences. Sometimes, they are unwarranted and illegitimate,

yet it seems you actually did say it.

Even so, there is so much you can learn about a poet, I think, from simply reading one poem.

it's there you said it. i say you only think you do.,


then you said

Tell me you don't know something about Pound from reading this thing. If all you can glean is that he was a character, that is still quite a bit!

bugger me, you said it again.


and i did but you didn't believe me
then you said

You haven't explicated what you mean at all by a work "standing alone." [/b]
don't tell me i'm discussing some irrelevant shite with some one who doesn't understand what "a work standing alone" means.

as for who's preaching, you seem to have a higher soap box than most any i've seen. so lets see, objectively you don't know anything of the poet from their poetry alone., an i right or am i right. because of this fact which you accepted any reference to know the poet henceforth will be deemed conjecture, did you see what i did there?
but this is my final post and i just know you won't be able not to reply so you win

The word "objective" is just not really appropriate for the kind of knowledge, in most cases, that we're going for. I never used it; that is your interjection. And I can weaken the claim about the "single poem" thing to many poems, without giving up entirely on what I'm arguing for.

You want sources? Start here.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/4...88-norton/