tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5888438300076664400.post2165619235730351189..comments2014-12-09T17:25:07.561-08:00Comments on Words and Images: The Human Abstract: Morality, Religion, and LoveAdamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5888438300076664400.post-21468424312058892592014-10-09T19:45:27.640-07:002014-10-09T19:45:27.640-07:00I like to see some ambition in a thesis. Yours mi...I like to see some ambition in a thesis. Yours might be excessive, but if you can a small part of it, I’ll be happy to see it.<br /><br />I like your focus on the paradoxes the poem (poems) encapsulate, and I like your observation, which seems rather central to me, that Urizen looks perplexed. You do a nice job of laying out the overall sense of paradox, difficulty, irony and uncertainty that encompasses Blake’s work. But if Urizen the creator is himself confused by his creation, and doesn’t know how to respond to it, how do we? Is there a higher meaning and unity beyond all of this irony and confusion?<br /><br />One thing I’d note about the human abstract is that its absence is notable. Your reading is fine, but doesn’t really address why the word itself is absent.<br /><br />A passing note that I may return to: you use Gleckner as a crutch. It’s productive and useful research - but there is a danger of simply repeating your research, rather than using it to develop your own work. It’s a trap you fall into.<br /><br />Overall: Your use of Gleckner is both interesting and excessive, but we don’t see what *your* purpose is. Your readings are good, but lack an overall unity. You have a good grape of the role of paradox and aporia in Blake - but what do you want to do with it? This essay shows good scholarship and attention to detail, but an inadequate central argument of your own.Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.com