ry way from all ill previ<>",
appearancet
and lead.
Hart-Clive-1962-Structure-and-Motif-in-Finnegans-Wake
.
.
.
.
.
.
the~',oto.
,D'390'-H, 's.
.
.
64, and ' I)iotap, J,.
l";"', D,lit, '57.
,. ,
? Uittnl)tiv
and pretentiously at tim. . . Although, '" 1 havc . aid, the d~tail of joyce'. boob is almo,t always derived from recognisable ( xternal IOUrcts, he iI, in major technical matters, alwaY'lless
derivative than one at fi. . . t imagin. . . . He did not, at did many of his contemporaries, combine the activities (If aUlhor and critic and, though a great innovator, he was much less sophi. <ticaled in literary matt. en than such adulators at EugeneJolat liked 10 believe. He wat fully co! l! cious of his own grt;atness- hi. < wife, Nora, told Frank Budgen': 'Ah, there'. (lnly (In<: man he', got to getthebetterofnnw,andthat',thatShake,peare! '-buttlu: imprasion (lne gains fr(lm biographi. . , ktten and conw:nation with his associates is (If a man not wholly in touch with the main . ! ream of Engli. ,h literature, past or present, and not wholly aware of bi. , ( l w n <<:lation to it. Indeed, he paid little attention
10 any but a few great names in litcratur<: and w<lrked in an isolation that was not so much aJTOglnt and . . ,If-willed as unconscious and naive. ~ we learn with Klme surprise, he had not r<:ad Ca! T(lU until he was well into F;nMKatt1 Wake, and then only h<<au. . somebody had comrru::nted (In the oimilarity. ' It S","IDS likely that he had n<:vt:r <<:ad ""me of lilt: apparmtly obviou! literary and phil,osophical mode! . for hi. , wtltk,' and
circumspection i. therefore nI:C=ry in a""",,,ing to what extent joyce was comciou, of hi> predtceMOl"3' Ullt: ofleitmotiv. }'ortun_ atdy a little cu-. :unutantial evi<k:ncc is available. He was devoted to the "pcra and, alth<:>ugh he did n<:>1 like Wagner, he knew hi. , work and ,,? at r. . ,nvrnant with hi. , technique'; he w,,", at leal! t consciou. (If tlu: <xis"'n", of Tlwm,,", Mann, since he names D" Zau/lerbtrK in Fi1IIItK"tt1 Wdk. (608. 19); he had read some Prou. t and q=tes ""vcra! titles. ' 'fhis evid<:nce docs nm,
it;" true, am(lun! to very much, but it;" probably mffici<:m (" U]()w th:>. ! at le""'t j<>y<< did not think he had invented the
, Inform. atioo recdV<<! rcom F. . . . "k lI\odg<:n.
? U l l n . , p . '5~.
? :l. lr. h. nk 1lu<1. g<n 'db ,n< iliat whool ho knew him b<ot Joy<<'. au"",,_ cdg< of H<fcl, for ;"'t:mce, W\U q"ite ol;gIo. t.
? s. . ,fura1mpl<,Ellma,m,p. tl3. . nd S. 0;1I)O>"t. J""",J_',vV'"'' L < ? . J o n , ' 9 5 ' , p p . 039"~o.
? Ath",ton,p. '75.
,63
? l . l! itmotiD
ltibMtiu, as he once thought he h>. d invented j ahberwocky. ' In any case, Joy~r. " debt to (arlier model! in this matter is probably no greater than his . upposed debt to F. . . douard Dujardin with regard to the stram of COn><;;11umWi, and that debt mu. t be very . mall indeed. For better <>r filI wone,
joy<;e worked <>ul almost all hi, malu. . . , stylistic habiu for hiJruClf and . uffered only the m m ! indirc<;! inlluencr. from other writers,
The word UifmIJtW itself is of comparatively . . . ,r,cnt origin, having been coiued by nans ",n Wolzogen for specific applka_ tion to the music of'"agner. ? In tlu: m>ci<:al world Waguer is,
of cou'""', the chief exponent of Ihe rru:thod, although il h. . . sometimes ~n ,ugge'ted that lu: hiIlW'lf derived Ihe idea in his tum from eadier literary modd. ,. D<:spite the faCI that it . pring> from a long list of ante<:e<ient<, lhe 1(ilmol;o proper, in tlu: ,"""ricted scme in whi(h I ule the word below, i. rare in literatu,"" before the prescnt century. In emhryonic fonn, how_ ever, as a corutantly repeated verbal formula aw>ciated Wilh
per",ms, pla= and thing>, the re<:um:nt mOlifis ofcourse to be found iu the formal lil(rat1l"" of virtually all weotem civili,a_ tions. Tlu: Homen( epithets and mrmulae, the rtfrairu aud hurderu in folk poetry and prayer are dire<:1 anc. ,. tors of the
{eilm. t;v, and Mann hinudf was fond of saying Ihat the tech_ nique can be tr-"e<:d al least as far back as Homer. The quaM. rituali. cic repetition of hy_phr""", in narrative goes back even funher, beyond the nrigin. of writing. A large class of follr_tal. . is WIISlIuctcd around a constandy recurring line of dialogue. Such ,tori. ,. 3. $ 'T"", Tit Tot' (,60. 02) 'Rumpel<liltskin' (:)70. 24) and all tl,cir many varianl. 'i a", the ultimate formal 5OU~ of joy<<:'. 'I'ranlrquean' (21-3) and 'Norwegian Captain' (3 ' 1-32) wilh their modulating 'riddle' motif.
The main r"'1uirement of a lIue lritmoti~;. that it should, 3. $ il. 'i name impli"', l({Id from poinl to point; il is, in fae! , an CDCIlrially dynamic device. Reiteration alone;' not enough 10 wnvert a phrue into a kiilfl(Jti~. Even Gertrude Stcin, who,
, A,""",on, u. . . p""5: 'L<:w:" C. ","l: The Unf<=K<Jl. l'=uroor'. , 0 . Wal. . ,l, Do. W. . - . . . . . . . . k, L<-i~, ,~, p. '5i.
,6,
? LdtmQti~
with Ihe pcmible exceplion of P~guy, must be: the greatest devotee ofrcpeliliven",-,wdlem lilerature hal ever known, Can_ nolraiKpurere""licion10lhenotu. ofkit. . . . Ii? . Rcal~tW entaib a u'"" of otatemenl and "",\:itemen, in 'u~h a way as 10 impel the ",ader to male part to part; eaeh recurrence of ,u"h a motif derives in some nec. . ". . .
ry way from all ill previ<>", appearancet and lead. On 10 fulure resurgence', poinling 10 cotTetpondenceo and relationships far beyond Ihoo< ,hal hold bttwt<:n Ihe individual motif and ilS immediale conlext. 'lbe full roUl"Oe of ,uch a motif, appearing and d;'app"aring, now in full view, now fainlly ,uggctIW, mn,1 bt coruid"w a. a whole; like Mr. Brown', 'expanding . ymbob' every . ucceosIul UUm<l/i. lake. on a life of ilS own and continually . nrichet holt. itselfand il;$ contexll as il bean a m"", ofa;. wcialion from one app"an>. Ilce 10 anolher. ' II will be appareol Ihal an Ql. linato a,ide like 'Hurry np pIe"", iI" time', in Mr. Eliol'. Tkt W02SI, fATUI,;" nolleil. . . . ti" in Ihe ""lUt: in which I am "'ing the Ie"n, ,iorA: il don nOllead Ibe reader from part 10 part, but-with however ricb an irony-function. inde""ndently at e~h Ual<:- men\. Similarly, Iar~-Kale rep:lilion of material from tlte main body of a work dotS nol conslilllle IrilmDtiv. The r<:peated burden of a ballad, for example, which maket a verbal rondo out of narrative, has nothing to do with WtMtU; beca. . . ", even iflhe burden i. varied, il leach nowbere bul mainlain> a 'tali~ relationsbip 1<> Ibe narrati"" Ihemts. Leitmotiv, 10 be eff<xlive, mml in facl grow funclionally from the evolving material, yel nol recur regularly in a wholly predictable way; it mml aro"", exp:ctations ofilS ",app"arance and yet give new insighl! when il doe. recur; it mun be a . baping influence, nOllhe fulfilment of predelermined funnal ""Il. llremenlS; il musl bave an active,
rath. . than a paosive, function. "[be n"",,""ary qualit;e, are much Ihe . arne a. Ih"'" . pecifioo hy Mr. Forster f<>r 'rhylhm":
'not 10 be tbere all Ihe time like a pattern, but by il1lovely wax_ ing and waning to fill u. wilh ,urprise and frtshn. . . and hope. '
, E. K. 110"(1"". ~ "' IN X. . . t. Toron'o, '950, Chapt. . ~.
? f. M. Font<<, A,,,,,,, . fIN N. . . . I, Loodoo, '949, pp. ,65
' ~3-{-
? UitmlJliv
R. . th~rLikeOOI~ofPavlov'l dogI. the",aderisgentlyoonditioned to apec:t a motifw! . = he iI . . . bjor;led 10 certain 'Jtimuli'. Th_
rtimuli m;iY ~
symbols, thematic; aI1ll1ions, or \1\(. preseDeC of other moti&. ? ~ proesdifl'cn &nmphyucalcoDdltioning. howen. , in thill
I
of narrative aituations, configuntiona of
both lIimulul and raporut: ruWI ~ constantly valied 10 that what began as . . rimpk one-to-one relationship may expand into something ridlly and often myatc:riously . ugg""tive. It i, jlUt this dynamic flexibility and ever-increaoing power of the k;r_iD \0 e\"Ok and to widen ill bound, thaI sav. . the tech- nique from dcgenenting into a dry. pro6tlea and mechanical memory1lame. Af~mustemphaticallyDOlcomplywilh <he ckfinition offered by Mr. Robert Humphrey':
'il may be: ddlned as a recurring image, symbol, word, or phrase which carrie. . . Italic association with a cmain idta or theme. '
The most highly developed motifl in Fi"""I'1U Wd. allolin the maximum possible flexibility of cuntent. Joyce c",,,tCl, or boliOWl from popular lor<:. formal bnill wilh an easily recog. nUable . hape or rhythm; into lhe! . < empty . helli he is able to pour almOlt any kind of c. ontcnt, jult ill a poetic otI. . . . a. form
m. ay be filled ,,'lth vinually any ,,-oro. . Iu I hn. . , pointed out, popubr sayings, cliches, provcrbt and the lik an; wonderfully . uiledtoJoyce'. purposesin1"~tmU lYoA:. ;anheMeddois evoI<e a well? known rhythm ;1\ Ihe reader'l oomcioUlnQII, aner which he isfree to . . . . , his. . . . ro-play to luperposeon that rhythm alma. 1 Iny dcoircd nuan"" ofaeRIe. The rise and fall, Ihe p. ain and joy of the cha. ractcn, can ~ widely and lubtly rdl<< ted in Ihe changing 1urD. "" and tone of luch moti&. Their flexibililY will have become appal'alt in the exampla which I have al?
ready had occasion to quote. TechnicallytheI~;'ahighlyoelf. . :. ontcio. . . <kvi<<. It
fun<;1ionl primarily at the outfa~ level, . . -ithin \h( verbal texture. a. arly it dna OOt commend itJclf to novdisu. who adopt a limple and . df? drac;ng . tylo, but it coma quite
I R. H~mpI<r<y, S"""" 'l/C_ _ II", 1M M. . tm. Now! , llefkdey . . . . . . r. . . ""lIdo, '958, pp. 9>-',
,66
? Ltitnwlio
naturally from the pen ofajoy<<. Thomas Mann, tb. moot . df- eon. dow of all expononta of the ltitm. ! ;" and the real architeet of the fully de. . . ,1opcd literary motif, mixed it into. lucid, tra~t, forward? moving namui. . . , uylc. We are, as a mult, ronsl. lntly impelled to Ihlft Our al(j:ntlon from the lubjcc:l? matter seen through the words to the worw thcrn5elves, and while thit change of focul can often be Itimubting in theory, tome readm find it, in practice, extreml'ly distracting. No IUch d~tion lia in the way of the . . . :adeT ofPiMq_ Wdt, in which surface_tature haa become aU. important. Within it nothing i, artificial because all is frankly artifice, nothing ;. lupcrficial because all il lunaee. The more dearly j oyce can IOcw our auemion On the IUrface details of his style, the ktt. . we are able to appreciate his meaning. There is ne""r any
quation ofreading through the "","", which has becn virtually engulfed hy the ltitrnl>li<> technique. It is prohably true to oay
that <;very paragnph in Pb"" glUU Wak. it both built up out of picct:s draWl:( from dJcwooe in the book and, ron",,~ly, capable of being broken down and related 10 all the divnse
t;Onte:x1S from which those piec. . ca"",.
Of course the motif. in Fi~". gallJ Work. are not all equally
functional or dynamic, and there are a considerahle number which appro:rimate to what Wahd colis tbe Visi~w, or what Mr. Fortier neatly design"t. . a 'banner''-although (""n in thc cue of jOY~'1 simplest adaptations of Homeric epithet and the catch_phrase of Dicke",ian caricature, he i.
,. ,
? Uittnl)tiv
and pretentiously at tim. . . Although, '" 1 havc . aid, the d~tail of joyce'. boob is almo,t always derived from recognisable ( xternal IOUrcts, he iI, in major technical matters, alwaY'lless
derivative than one at fi. . . t imagin. . . . He did not, at did many of his contemporaries, combine the activities (If aUlhor and critic and, though a great innovator, he was much less sophi. <ticaled in literary matt. en than such adulators at EugeneJolat liked 10 believe. He wat fully co! l! cious of his own grt;atness- hi. < wife, Nora, told Frank Budgen': 'Ah, there'. (lnly (In<: man he', got to getthebetterofnnw,andthat',thatShake,peare! '-buttlu: imprasion (lne gains fr(lm biographi. . , ktten and conw:nation with his associates is (If a man not wholly in touch with the main . ! ream of Engli. ,h literature, past or present, and not wholly aware of bi. , ( l w n <<:lation to it. Indeed, he paid little attention
10 any but a few great names in litcratur<: and w<lrked in an isolation that was not so much aJTOglnt and . . ,If-willed as unconscious and naive. ~ we learn with Klme surprise, he had not r<:ad Ca! T(lU until he was well into F;nMKatt1 Wake, and then only h<<au. . somebody had comrru::nted (In the oimilarity. ' It S","IDS likely that he had n<:vt:r <<:ad ""me of lilt: apparmtly obviou! literary and phil,osophical mode! . for hi. , wtltk,' and
circumspection i. therefore nI:C=ry in a""",,,ing to what extent joyce was comciou, of hi> predtceMOl"3' Ullt: ofleitmotiv. }'ortun_ atdy a little cu-. :unutantial evi<k:ncc is available. He was devoted to the "pcra and, alth<:>ugh he did n<:>1 like Wagner, he knew hi. , work and ,,? at r. . ,nvrnant with hi. , technique'; he w,,", at leal! t consciou. (If tlu: <xis"'n", of Tlwm,,", Mann, since he names D" Zau/lerbtrK in Fi1IIItK"tt1 Wdk. (608. 19); he had read some Prou. t and q=tes ""vcra! titles. ' 'fhis evid<:nce docs nm,
it;" true, am(lun! to very much, but it;" probably mffici<:m (" U]()w th:>. ! at le""'t j<>y<< did not think he had invented the
, Inform. atioo recdV<<! rcom F. . . . "k lI\odg<:n.
? U l l n . , p . '5~.
? :l. lr. h. nk 1lu<1. g<n 'db ,n< iliat whool ho knew him b<ot Joy<<'. au"",,_ cdg< of H<fcl, for ;"'t:mce, W\U q"ite ol;gIo. t.
? s. . ,fura1mpl<,Ellma,m,p. tl3. . nd S. 0;1I)O>"t. J""",J_',vV'"'' L < ? . J o n , ' 9 5 ' , p p . 039"~o.
? Ath",ton,p. '75.
,63
? l . l! itmotiD
ltibMtiu, as he once thought he h>. d invented j ahberwocky. ' In any case, Joy~r. " debt to (arlier model! in this matter is probably no greater than his . upposed debt to F. . . douard Dujardin with regard to the stram of COn><;;11umWi, and that debt mu. t be very . mall indeed. For better <>r filI wone,
joy<;e worked <>ul almost all hi, malu. . . , stylistic habiu for hiJruClf and . uffered only the m m ! indirc<;! inlluencr. from other writers,
The word UifmIJtW itself is of comparatively . . . ,r,cnt origin, having been coiued by nans ",n Wolzogen for specific applka_ tion to the music of'"agner. ? In tlu: m>ci<:al world Waguer is,
of cou'""', the chief exponent of Ihe rru:thod, although il h. . . sometimes ~n ,ugge'ted that lu: hiIlW'lf derived Ihe idea in his tum from eadier literary modd. ,. D<:spite the faCI that it . pring> from a long list of ante<:e<ient<, lhe 1(ilmol;o proper, in tlu: ,"""ricted scme in whi(h I ule the word below, i. rare in literatu,"" before the prescnt century. In emhryonic fonn, how_ ever, as a corutantly repeated verbal formula aw>ciated Wilh
per",ms, pla= and thing>, the re<:um:nt mOlifis ofcourse to be found iu the formal lil(rat1l"" of virtually all weotem civili,a_ tions. Tlu: Homen( epithets and mrmulae, the rtfrairu aud hurderu in folk poetry and prayer are dire<:1 anc. ,. tors of the
{eilm. t;v, and Mann hinudf was fond of saying Ihat the tech_ nique can be tr-"e<:d al least as far back as Homer. The quaM. rituali. cic repetition of hy_phr""", in narrative goes back even funher, beyond the nrigin. of writing. A large class of follr_tal. . is WIISlIuctcd around a constandy recurring line of dialogue. Such ,tori. ,. 3. $ 'T"", Tit Tot' (,60. 02) 'Rumpel<liltskin' (:)70. 24) and all tl,cir many varianl. 'i a", the ultimate formal 5OU~ of joy<<:'. 'I'ranlrquean' (21-3) and 'Norwegian Captain' (3 ' 1-32) wilh their modulating 'riddle' motif.
The main r"'1uirement of a lIue lritmoti~;. that it should, 3. $ il. 'i name impli"', l({Id from poinl to point; il is, in fae! , an CDCIlrially dynamic device. Reiteration alone;' not enough 10 wnvert a phrue into a kiilfl(Jti~. Even Gertrude Stcin, who,
, A,""",on, u. . . p""5: 'L<:w:" C. ","l: The Unf<=K<Jl. l'=uroor'. , 0 . Wal. . ,l, Do. W. . - . . . . . . . . k, L<-i~, ,~, p. '5i.
,6,
? LdtmQti~
with Ihe pcmible exceplion of P~guy, must be: the greatest devotee ofrcpeliliven",-,wdlem lilerature hal ever known, Can_ nolraiKpurere""licion10lhenotu. ofkit. . . . Ii? . Rcal~tW entaib a u'"" of otatemenl and "",\:itemen, in 'u~h a way as 10 impel the ",ader to male part to part; eaeh recurrence of ,u"h a motif derives in some nec. . ". . .
ry way from all ill previ<>", appearancet and lead. On 10 fulure resurgence', poinling 10 cotTetpondenceo and relationships far beyond Ihoo< ,hal hold bttwt<:n Ihe individual motif and ilS immediale conlext. 'lbe full roUl"Oe of ,uch a motif, appearing and d;'app"aring, now in full view, now fainlly ,uggctIW, mn,1 bt coruid"w a. a whole; like Mr. Brown', 'expanding . ymbob' every . ucceosIul UUm<l/i. lake. on a life of ilS own and continually . nrichet holt. itselfand il;$ contexll as il bean a m"", ofa;. wcialion from one app"an>. Ilce 10 anolher. ' II will be appareol Ihal an Ql. linato a,ide like 'Hurry np pIe"", iI" time', in Mr. Eliol'. Tkt W02SI, fATUI,;" nolleil. . . . ti" in Ihe ""lUt: in which I am "'ing the Ie"n, ,iorA: il don nOllead Ibe reader from part 10 part, but-with however ricb an irony-function. inde""ndently at e~h Ual<:- men\. Similarly, Iar~-Kale rep:lilion of material from tlte main body of a work dotS nol conslilllle IrilmDtiv. The r<:peated burden of a ballad, for example, which maket a verbal rondo out of narrative, has nothing to do with WtMtU; beca. . . ", even iflhe burden i. varied, il leach nowbere bul mainlain> a 'tali~ relationsbip 1<> Ibe narrati"" Ihemts. Leitmotiv, 10 be eff<xlive, mml in facl grow funclionally from the evolving material, yel nol recur regularly in a wholly predictable way; it mml aro"", exp:ctations ofilS ",app"arance and yet give new insighl! when il doe. recur; it mun be a . baping influence, nOllhe fulfilment of predelermined funnal ""Il. llremenlS; il musl bave an active,
rath. . than a paosive, function. "[be n"",,""ary qualit;e, are much Ihe . arne a. Ih"'" . pecifioo hy Mr. Forster f<>r 'rhylhm":
'not 10 be tbere all Ihe time like a pattern, but by il1lovely wax_ ing and waning to fill u. wilh ,urprise and frtshn. . . and hope. '
, E. K. 110"(1"". ~ "' IN X. . . t. Toron'o, '950, Chapt. . ~.
? f. M. Font<<, A,,,,,,, . fIN N. . . . I, Loodoo, '949, pp. ,65
' ~3-{-
? UitmlJliv
R. . th~rLikeOOI~ofPavlov'l dogI. the",aderisgentlyoonditioned to apec:t a motifw! . = he iI . . . bjor;led 10 certain 'Jtimuli'. Th_
rtimuli m;iY ~
symbols, thematic; aI1ll1ions, or \1\(. preseDeC of other moti&. ? ~ proesdifl'cn &nmphyucalcoDdltioning. howen. , in thill
I
of narrative aituations, configuntiona of
both lIimulul and raporut: ruWI ~ constantly valied 10 that what began as . . rimpk one-to-one relationship may expand into something ridlly and often myatc:riously . ugg""tive. It i, jlUt this dynamic flexibility and ever-increaoing power of the k;r_iD \0 e\"Ok and to widen ill bound, thaI sav. . the tech- nique from dcgenenting into a dry. pro6tlea and mechanical memory1lame. Af~mustemphaticallyDOlcomplywilh <he ckfinition offered by Mr. Robert Humphrey':
'il may be: ddlned as a recurring image, symbol, word, or phrase which carrie. . . Italic association with a cmain idta or theme. '
The most highly developed motifl in Fi"""I'1U Wd. allolin the maximum possible flexibility of cuntent. Joyce c",,,tCl, or boliOWl from popular lor<:. formal bnill wilh an easily recog. nUable . hape or rhythm; into lhe! . < empty . helli he is able to pour almOlt any kind of c. ontcnt, jult ill a poetic otI. . . . a. form
m. ay be filled ,,'lth vinually any ,,-oro. . Iu I hn. . , pointed out, popubr sayings, cliches, provcrbt and the lik an; wonderfully . uiledtoJoyce'. purposesin1"~tmU lYoA:. ;anheMeddois evoI<e a well? known rhythm ;1\ Ihe reader'l oomcioUlnQII, aner which he isfree to . . . . , his. . . . ro-play to luperposeon that rhythm alma. 1 Iny dcoircd nuan"" ofaeRIe. The rise and fall, Ihe p. ain and joy of the cha. ractcn, can ~ widely and lubtly rdl<< ted in Ihe changing 1urD. "" and tone of luch moti&. Their flexibililY will have become appal'alt in the exampla which I have al?
ready had occasion to quote. TechnicallytheI~;'ahighlyoelf. . :. ontcio. . . <kvi<<. It
fun<;1ionl primarily at the outfa~ level, . . -ithin \h( verbal texture. a. arly it dna OOt commend itJclf to novdisu. who adopt a limple and . df? drac;ng . tylo, but it coma quite
I R. H~mpI<r<y, S"""" 'l/C_ _ II", 1M M. . tm. Now! , llefkdey . . . . . . r. . . ""lIdo, '958, pp. 9>-',
,66
? Ltitnwlio
naturally from the pen ofajoy<<. Thomas Mann, tb. moot . df- eon. dow of all expononta of the ltitm. ! ;" and the real architeet of the fully de. . . ,1opcd literary motif, mixed it into. lucid, tra~t, forward? moving namui. . . , uylc. We are, as a mult, ronsl. lntly impelled to Ihlft Our al(j:ntlon from the lubjcc:l? matter seen through the words to the worw thcrn5elves, and while thit change of focul can often be Itimubting in theory, tome readm find it, in practice, extreml'ly distracting. No IUch d~tion lia in the way of the . . . :adeT ofPiMq_ Wdt, in which surface_tature haa become aU. important. Within it nothing i, artificial because all is frankly artifice, nothing ;. lupcrficial because all il lunaee. The more dearly j oyce can IOcw our auemion On the IUrface details of his style, the ktt. . we are able to appreciate his meaning. There is ne""r any
quation ofreading through the "","", which has becn virtually engulfed hy the ltitrnl>li<> technique. It is prohably true to oay
that <;very paragnph in Pb"" glUU Wak. it both built up out of picct:s draWl:( from dJcwooe in the book and, ron",,~ly, capable of being broken down and related 10 all the divnse
t;Onte:x1S from which those piec. . ca"",.
Of course the motif. in Fi~". gallJ Work. are not all equally
functional or dynamic, and there are a considerahle number which appro:rimate to what Wahd colis tbe Visi~w, or what Mr. Fortier neatly design"t. . a 'banner''-although (""n in thc cue of jOY~'1 simplest adaptations of Homeric epithet and the catch_phrase of Dicke",ian caricature, he i.
