Creaking springs
Sir: If Mr Purser (Letters, 5 January) thought my review of Miss Raines book mockery and a `send-up,' he retorted with a restraint and ami- ability 1 might not have maintained myself, had I been him. But he quite misunderstood what I wrote. My scrap of dialogue was no skit on Plato's mannerisms: its aim was to show, in Mae, that I knew something of how Plato thought, and came at Miss Raine's book from inside, not out. Doubtless others could have done this better, but that is beside the point. The first thing I said was that not-good judges would reject her book, and good ones do otherwise. As for what can 'fairly be argued'—well, I chose when I wrote that kind of review not to belabour where I took issue with Miss Raine, and I stick to that; but there is plenty of argument. and I think close argument too, in that short piece, if one looks for it. I refrain from the self-advertisement of citation, but I believe that no one who at all knows my own relevant writings in prose or verse could possibly think me scornful of Miss Raines position, or not opposed (if along other lines) to much or most
Wickhambrook, Suffolk
Previous page
