JB wrote:

"one way to deflect criticism of oneself is to direct it at someone else.
while it may be interesting to discuss Pound's objectivity, why would I want
to discuss it with someone whose objectivity I've called into question. . .
. ."

I don't know.   I can appreciate the fact that you believe my approach is
not objective.  Perhaps you could tell us whose approach is objective, and
give us an example of objective criticism of Pound.  You should of course
feel free to criticize my method.  Nevertheless, the issue of Pound's
objectivity might be more appropriate to this list than a personal
evaluation of what you might --rightly or wrongly-- consider to be a lack of
objectivity on my part.

When I produce a Pound quote to demonstrate that Pound thought Confucianism
was the ONLY appropriate philosophy for an orderly society you might counter
with a quote from Pound, some evidence, or some analysis.  You did reply to
my post, but since you do not address my assertion that Pound lacks
objectivity I have to wonder.  Do you have any evidence or any analysis
which can call my conclusion into question?  If you would rather talk about
me than about Pound, I have no objection.  But I hope you will forgive me if
I bring the discussion around to Pound's poetry, his prose writings, his
spoken remarks, and other aspects of his life that might shed light on his
place in the history of letters.


If you want to address my particular arguments, fine.  But just to quote me
and say "see what I mean" does not seem to be a sufficient response to the
evidence I present.

Regards,

Wei



________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com