zodiac28 Sep 2004

"to prove good poets make good critics requires one to name good poets and not good critics" is obviously not the case. The set of {best poets who also happen to be best critics} should be exactly the same as the set of {best critics who also happen to be best poets}. That it's not is set to be the enduring smudge on the underclothes of your repute here. Give it up.

I asked if you knew one good critic because I think you're talking entirely out of your ass, not because I care whether your argument is true or not (I know it's not.)

PS-My last PS is two sentences. Do you find "Obviously 'statement X' is bow'ls" to be inordinately complicated?