Alan --
"Peter's analysis of 'disunity in poetical readings' is well teased
out & right on the button; orthodoxies & large assumptions are so easily
built & traded over these essential privacies."
What are "these essential privacies"? Some kind of idealism wafts beneath
this. Fichtean maybe, where 'existence' is negative because only 'reason'
exists in and for itself, with its own set of hedges and one-way catflap.
How is privacy -- any of it -- essential? I suppose I mean also to ask,
isn't 'privacy' quite the wong word? Are we by "nature" private, have we
been privatized, what is deprivation etc.
I think Peter it would be useful -- to me at least -- if you would show
your workings.
K
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|