see what I mean?

In a message dated 06/28/2000 1:05:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<
 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.
  >>

In a message dated 06/27/2000 9:57:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, JBCM2 writes:

<<
 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
can certainly understand why Wei wants to turn the light on Pound, but I'm
not buying it.  others can, if they choose, but since I already know that
Wei's conclusion is that Pound wasn't objective, and that he was a
Nazi/Fascist/neo-Confucinist. etc.

 i.e.

 << Take for instance, Pound's use of the phrase * * t'ai4 p'ing2 in Canto 98.
 The characters and their romanized equivalents are placed next to the words
 "and that the equilibrium
                         t'ai4 p'ing2
 of the Empire grips the earth in good manners."  98/703.  [Here we are with
 "good a manners" again.  No reason to forget that Pound said the "Nazis had
 wiped out bad manners in Germany"]. >>

 see what I mean?

 jb... >>