EPOUND-L Archives

- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine

EPOUND-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Daniel Pearlman <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:57:34 -0500
In-Reply-To:
<l03130305b25d894b4d04@[130.95.192.143]>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To:
Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
Richard,
 
On just one of your points, viz.: "Also, I'm not sure that Darwin
>remains Darwin or Selection is still Natural once transposed onto the
>cultural plane."  May I remind you that Richard Dawkins, author
of the immensely popular, neo-Darwinian "The Selfish Gene,"
contributed the idea of the "meme," the cultural equivalent of
the gene, as subject--on the highly accelerated historical
plane--to pressures of natural selection analogous to the
biological?
 
==Dan
 
 
At 11:30 AM 10/29/98 +0800, you wrote:
>I appreciate your distaste for rivalry, Dan - and thanks for your remarks.
>Though I suppose there are some one-to-one relationships between biological
>malfunction and volitional behaviour of 'the man who mistook his wife for a
>hat' variety, I wouldn't want to argue any more than you that an artistic
>form reflects a biological predisposition directly - there are too many
>mediating institutional and other factors to be taken into account, and
>bourgeois biological universalisms of the Peter Fuller variety have been
>well critiqued by Tony Bennett, for example. I like the way you turn up the
>heat for reconsideration of abstract metacritical perspectives, though note
>that 'predisposed, pre-cracked minds' implies some absolute criterion of
>sanity that PERHAPS militates against that reconsideration (perhaps though
>sanity is transhistorical in some sense). Also, I'm not sure that Darwin
>remains Darwin or Selection is still Natural once transposed onto the
>cultural plane. Was it not Darwin who expressed surprise at discovering
>that works of art were useless for investigating the physiological basis of
>emotional expression in man and animals? That's slightly beside the point,
>I concede, and in thinking that I see what in general you mean, would rush
>- if I knew enough about them - to a plethora of political and sociological
>schemes (Simmel, Weber, Ellias(?)) to shore it up.
>
>Richard
 
Dan Pearlman                    Office: Department of English
102 Blackstone Blvd. #5                 University of Rhode Island
Providence, RI 02906                    Kingston, RI 02881
Tel.: 401 453-3027                      Tel.: 401 874-4659
email: [log in to unmask]            Fax:  401 874-2580

ATOM RSS1 RSS2