p81 Jarrett suggests that heuretics = invention ; hermeneutics = imitation or interpretation
First of all: is this right? Secondly: why are imitation and interpretation lumped together?
can't stand the whole "hymen" metaphor. especially with the verb "breach." (82)
Not really sure what Jarrett is calling a writer's "signature." Form? Voice? Formvoiceargument? This needs clarification.... Jarrett's signature may be what is irking me so.
And then the names. Okiedokie. We like words now don't we? Although "the interdependence of jams and jars" (95) speaks clearly enough about dynamic relationships between form and argument, discourse and position.
p101 Jarrett cites Fitzgerald saying that Jazz had "no interest in politics at all." True? Oversimplified? Misrepresentative? Commonly accepted notion? Yes to all?