Incidentally, I've printed out and read fairly carefully about 10 pages of his poetry -- he does, as they say, "have an ear." I suspect that ultimately his politics are closer to Chuck Munson's than to mine -- but I don't know, and I'm probably never going to find out. His web site remains one of those highly interesting avenues out there in the world that I simply don't have world enough and time to walk down. Like long posts (let alone books) on commuicative action theory, or more by or about Butler than I've already read; nor, probably, am I going to reread _Remembrance of Things Past_, as much as I'd dearly love to. I've only read the _Grundrisse_ three times, and even at the age of 72 that is clearly unsatisfactory, so I'm going to have to make world enough and time for that (migraine-triggered multi-infarct dementia permitting); and since most of the people I know, whether friends or foes of Lenin, have clearly not read the first 10 volumes of his collected works with any understanding, I'm going to have to do a lot of rereading in those volumes. And so forth.
Now my claim is not that people "should" limit their reading and refuse to follow up on many important topics, my claim is that unless they admit that this is what they ARE doing, willy-nilly, they either are seriously unconscious of their own practices or they are just simply lying.
Carlo does have interesting things to say about Pound, and the poems I've read by him show that he really has understood at least something of Pound's metrical practice. I encountered him (and the URL I gave) on the Pound discussion list.
Carrol
Chuck Grimes wrote:
>
> Try browing in this.
>
> Carlo Parcelli, Is everyday language sufficient to embody everyday
> experience?....
>
> Carrol Cox
>
> -------------
>
> Okay. I tried. (http://www.flashpointmag.com/everyday.htm):
>