No, you have to sign on, and they make you go through 6this every few
months, but thereafter their server recognizes you when you log in--it
doesn't automatically download.
The same is true for the NYRB, by the wy, and even their archive is free.
Mark
At 12:00 AM 9/11/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>Ah, it requires you to subscribe, tom, and I don't really fancy having the
>NYT downloaded into my Inbox every day.
>
>So wot was it about?
>
>
>Best
>
>
>Dave
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Thomas Bell, Psyd" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 9:28 PM
>Subject: Re: Postmodern?/more baroque
>
>
>> this story from the NYTimes might be relevant here?
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/08/arts/08CONN.html
>>
>> tom bell
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "david.bircumshaw" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 5:21 PM
>> Subject: Re: Postmodern?/more baroque
>>
>>
>> > > While we're at it, you do, like most of us, suck at the trough of
>> > bourgeois
>> > > society. By the way
>> >
>> > Yes, Mark, we do.
>> >
>> > Altho' I can claim impeccable Brit working class credentials I'm very
>> aware
>> > too that my relative poverty is wealth by the standards of the Third
>World
>> > and as well I have no idea what investments my company pension fund
>> derives
>> > its returns from.
>> >
>> > Mea culpa, altho' I'm very innocent by nature.
>> >
>> > Best
>> >
>> > Dave
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Mark Weiss" <[log in to unmask]>
>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 10:59 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Postmodern?/more baroque
>> >
>> >
>> > > You don't really mean that. Just throw anything at the page? Learn
>> nothing
>> > > from the practice of one's craft?
>> > >
>> > > Of course I could say that any prestructured project reifies
>hierarchy,
>> > but
>> > > that would be pretty dumb. Also tactless and (intellectually)
>immature.
>> > >
>> > > If you don't want to engage an argument just say so. This sort of
>> sidestep
>> > > just pisses me off. I have a hard time abiding political accusations
>or
>> > > fools in silence. Reminds me, I guess, of the endless arguments of my
>> > > adolescence about who was a better Trotskyist.
>> > >
>> > > While we're at it, you do, like most of us, suck at the trough of
>> > bourgeois
>> > > society. By the way.
>> > >
>> > > Mark
>> > >
>> > > At 08:49 PM 9/10/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>> > > >On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:29:39 -0700, Mark Weiss
><[log in to unmask]>
>> > > >wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >>The links between the
>> > > >>>poet and the literary/cultural theorist is somehow unavoidable. I
>> > myself
>> > > >>>do not believe in spontaneity and I hope that behind each poet
>there
>> is
>> > a
>> > > >>>project not merely a vent of words, an outburst of tears or joy,
>the
>> > > >desire
>> > > >>>to give find expression for one's wrath.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Theorists, some of them poets, will continue to theorize and
>> > occasionally
>> > > >>invent isms, but the impact of the link is certainly avoidable if
>> theory
>> > > >>follows from, is derived from, practice.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Writing spontaneously doesn't mean writing egotistically. Writing
>with
>> a
>> > > >>project in mind often does. One is finally only protected from
>oneself
>> > by
>> > > >>tact and maturity.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Mark
>> > > >
>> > > >By the way: tact and maturity are no reelvant measures for poetry.
>> > > >these are good measures for bourgeois society.
>> > > >
>> > > >erminia
>> > > >
>> > >
>>
>
|