Lester (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988 ), p. 11 ; Maurice
Blanchot, ‘The Athenaeum’, in The Infinite Conversation, trans. Susan
Hanson (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993 ), 351 – 9 (p. 359 );
Paul de Man, ‘The Rhetoric of Temporality’,Blindness and Insight, 2 nd edn
(London: Routledge, 1983 ), 187 – 228 (pp. 220 – 2 ); Rodolphe Gasche ́,
foreword to Schlegel’s Philosophical Fragments,trans.PeterFirchow
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1991 ), p. xiii.
139 Cf. Anne Janowitz’s comments on Eliot in ‘The Romantic Fragment’, inA
Companion to Romanticism, ed. Duncan Wu (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998 ), 442 – 51.
140 Schlegel, Lucindeand the Fragments,p. 189.
141 T. S. Eliot, ‘A Brief Introduction to the Method of Paul Vale ́ry’, in Paul Vale ́ry,
Le Serpent, trans. Mark Wardle (London: Cobden-Sanderson, 1924 ), p. 12.
142 M. A. R. Habib,The Early T. S. Eliot and Western Philosophy(Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999 ), p. 198 ; Lacoue-Labarthe and Nancy,The
Literary Absolute,p. 12.
143 T. S. Eliot, ‘Critical’, inThe Collected Poems of Harold Monro, ed. Alida
Monro (London: Cobden-Sanderson, 1933 ), xiii–xiv.
144 Eliot, ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’, p. 17.
145 Coleridge,Lectures on Literature,I,p. 495.
146 DeGourmont, ‘The Problem of Style’, inSelectedWritings,p. 128.
147 Pound, editorial,Little Review 4 ( 1917 ), 6 ,EPP, II, p. 197.
148 Eliot, ‘London Letter’, p. 450.
149 Giorgio Agamben,The End of the Poem: Studies in Poetics, trans. Daniel
Heller-Roazen (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1999 ), p. 109.
150 Theodor Adorno,Aesthetic Theory, ed. Gretel Adorno and Rolf Tiedemann,
ed. and trans. Robert Hullot-Kentor (New York: Continuum, 2002 ), p. 146.
151 Selected Poems of Ezra Pound(London: Faber & Gwyer, 1928 ), p. x.
152 Jacques Derrida, ‘Che cos’e`la poesia?’, inPoints.. ., ed. Elizabeth Weber,
trans. Peggy Kamuf and others (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press,
1995 ), pp. 288 – 99.
153 Coleridge,Lectures on Literature,I,p. 495.
154 Coleridge himself conceded this (Lectures on Literature,I,p. 358 ) but insisted
that we still know an ash tree throughout all local variations of its form.
This would make the organic poem an affair of genre rather than a unique
self-relation.
CHAPTER 2 EDWARD THOMAS IN ECSTASY
1 Robert Ross,The Georgian Revolt(Carbondale: Southern Illinois University
Press, 1965 ), p. 99 ; A. Walton Litz and Lawrence Rainey, ‘Ezra Pound’, inThe
Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, 9 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1989 –), VII:Modernism and the New Criticism, ed. A.
Walton Litz, Louis Menand and Lawrence Rainey ( 2000 ), pp. 57 – 92 (p. 73 ).
2 Ross,TheGeorgianRevolt, pp. 110 , 155 – 6.208 Notes to pages 57 – 64