On 29 Aug 2010, at 16:13, David Latane wrote:
> It was very hard for me to take seriously an essay that begins not
> with an over-generalization but with a statement of fact that I know
> to be false. One of the problems with blogs, I suppose, is that
> there's no editor to pencil in the margin after a statement such as
> 'There is no historical evidence to suggest that during the Romantic
> era, something called “Poetics” existed.' A large "Really?"
OK, but maybe he is taking 'poetics' to mean something more
particular, or he is talking about a certain type or degree of
poetics, or a relationship between theory and practice which is
different to the historical relationship etc. I read that sentence and
thought exactly the same as you, that that just is not true - but it
hooked me. And there ARE people who think that poetics is a modern
invention, or something only indulged in by profs and
experimentalists. I admit that the article is badly flawed in that it
appears to be pandering to such stupid prejudices and ignorance, but
behind that there is something else more important which I think he is
trying to say.
Tim A.
|