But Pound's writing, line by line, is perfectly clear. The references,
foreign phrases, can be cleared up with a gloss, or one can skip them to
begin with. As the demands for "major form" show, the "problem" concerns
what the "secret" behind the surface clarity is. And then almost all
texts become "difficult."

Pound in I think an early essay compared the two statements, "Buy me a
pound of two-penny nails" and "Buy me the kind of painting I like."

The _Time_ reviewer of _Thrones_ was moved to echo an image from the
poem to describe the poem: the clarity of gin in cut glass.

Carrol

Tim Bray wrote:
>
> Tim Romano wrote:
> > Why read literature that lacks clarity?
>
> The question above has been obstinately staring me in the face every
> time I visit this list in recent weeks.  The question is too important
> to allow just deleting it, but the answer is less obvious the longer
> Tim's question sits there.
>
> Obviously, we *do* read and enjoy literature that lacks clarity.  The
> Cantos being a prime example.  And yet, clarity is clearly (so to speak)
> a virtue.  For example, you can make a case that Vikram Seth is the
> greatest living writer of English prose (a formidable poet too) and it
> is just impossible to imagine more transparent writing then Seth's.
>
> What other virtue in famous less-than-clear literature is it that
> compensates for lack of clarity?   I think this is a really important
> question. -Tim