Hite

[David Morris]

Well, it's pretty close.  First I suggested that Blicero was not opposing 
"Nature's cycle," but THEIR (fathers/sons) death/infection cycle, and that 
he sought to transcend that.  Next I supposed that this difference might be 
fallacious as Blicero's world-view might not acknowledge this distinction.

Here's a new question:  Would Bliceros' sincere lack of seeing a "Nature's 
cycle" which is uncorrupt, and his subsequent desire to transcend it (via 
whatever means he finds) make him evil?

My question was about the meaning of the "death/infection" cycle text and 
Terrance's ascribimg its true meaning to someone other than the "speaker."

David Morris

>From: Terrance jbor wrote: You still haven't responded to David Morris's 
>observation that "the 'cycle of infection and death' which _Blicero_ refers 
>to" is his Blicero's own take on the way "Nature's cycle" has been 
>corrupted (rather than his "misreading of Rilke", as you continually 
>propose yet have never substantiated), and Hite is making the same 
>connection between the "natural cycle" and what *Blicero* is calling "the 
>cycle of infection and death" as well.
>
>Is this what David Morris asked?
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com