Dear Shah,
There is no need for any apology. I'm sure your words did not hurt
anyone, and I'm sorry if my comments gave you that impression.
I was just pointing out what I thought is an important difference in
attitude, which I think may be a cultural one. In the West, I don't think
contemporay readers respond well to didactic poems, and it doesn't matter
what philosophical line they are expounding.
I think in great part that is because we enjoy ambiguity in poems, and
didactic poetry by its nature is not ambiguous.
I've often thought Keats would get a pretty rough ride if he wrote this
today:
"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,"--that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."
Come on, John, we'd all chorus on the lists- show us, don't tell us. LOL.
Kind regards,
grasshopper
----- Original Message -----
From: "c s shah" [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 9:12 AM
Subject: [THE-WORKS] A General Apology
> Dear Bob, Grassy, and all other friends,
>
> If my language has hurt anyone, I unconditionally apologize for the
> same. Believe me, I do not intend to act as a "boss in philosophy";
> it is just that I was interested in putting forward one philosophical
> line of "renunciation and service" as propounded by Swami Vivekananda.
> But lack of communication skill on my part, probably, has caused a
> misunderstanding. In every respect, I stand a degree lower to everyone
> in this list. And I try to learn.
>
> Thanks, and in the earnest,
>
> c s shah
>
|