That said, Dennis's comments on Marx's sentences is interesting. I tend to agree. Except that it is hard to find sentences that are _not_ "full of mutibple meaning." Consider how often Polonius is quoted as Shakespeare: "To thine own self be true..." Perhaps Polonius errs in not noticing that his words have multiple meaning??? Was "self" a simple word in Elizabethan English or was it packed with all the mystery it has accrued since? Or am I choosing the wrong path of all those paths that lead to one or another of the multiple meanings here? Susanne Langer remarks that just because sugar is so nice it doesn't foolow that one shoudl pour an extra pound of it into one's cake batter. How many multiple meanigns are desirable? Is there a limit to the number ofmeanings you want?
See, you've just achieved universality. Your sentence has multiple meanigns.
Carrol
Dennis Claxton wrote:
>
> At 10:07 AM 11/27/2009, Ted Winslow wrote:
>
> >I quoted Marx saying that.
> >
> >Shakespeare on "money" - on "avarice" - is "universal"; as is, so Marx
> >claims, Balzac.
> >
> >Such "universality" is his genius.
>
> I wouldn't disagree.
>
> >Marx "appropriates" Greek drama in the same way:
>
> This is where I would disagree. Even though you put it in quotation
> marks, I think appropriate misses the mark. Marx *studied*
> Shakespeare and philosophy and his immersion in such things helped
> make the sentences he wrote as full of multiple meaning as lines from
> Shakespeare.
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk