From: searc-AT-intex.ie Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 16:14:26 +0000 Subject: PLC: Re: phillitcrit-digest V1 #9 Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 09:00:54 -0500 From: tomdill-AT-wc.stephens.edu (TOM DILLINGHAM) Subject: Re: PLC: Searc's sophistry It would appear that Searc is one of those netdenizens who assumes it is his >>her privilege to spam lists with his random thoughts, usually uninformed and uncredited, >>Bullshit merely for the sake of stirring things up. >>Why would I want to do that - I thought this list was about philosophy and literary theory - where is the discussion of same?? He attempts to be provocative, then retreats and denies tha t he has meant what he has written or pleads, in this case, that he has "missed" some comments. >>The first thing I saw was the question about the Tyger - if there was a question before that I didn't see it. Hogwash. Searc's posts made assertions (including that he is "the biggest romantic around" whatever he supposes that may mean) which he is not prepared to support >>It means I like Romantic literature - its a Hiberno-English phase - Why are you up on your high horse?? . Such greased pig behavior is tiresomely common and familiar on internet discussion lists and probably best left to wither for lack of response. >>What so you can go on asking spurious questions?? I will leave it to others to figure out whether I am an undergraduate or not- >>Who cares? You may have written about Blake or even have known him in a previous life but you have yet to say anything vaguely interesting about him or his work or his time on the earth - come on he was mad - raving mad - a great poet, but mad as mad can be - certainly the only amusing comment so far from the tiresome searc. >>tiresome - oh dear, poor Tom - how did I read Dillinger for Dillingham, was the the gun smoke blazing from your email - Searc ------------------------------ End of phillitcrit-digest V1 #9 *******************************
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005