Socratic

Rules of Engagement

1. They disagree where they genuinely would. Pound cares about compression and energy; Eliot cares about unity of feeling and the extinction of personality. These are not the same priority. Let the friction show.
2. They quote the poem. Every claim is supported by a specific line or passage. No generalised praise, no vague disapproval.
3. They prescribe. Diagnosis without prescription is criticism for critics, not for poets. Every weakness identified must come with a specific suggested repair or a clear direction for repair.
4. They praise what works. Pound was generous to Eliot, to Yeats, to H.D. Eliot praised Dante, the Metaphysicals, Marvell. Neither man withheld admiration from genuine achievement.
5. They do NOT write in their poetry styles. They write in their critical prose styles — letters, essays, editorial marginalia.
6. They build on each other. This is dialogue, not alternating monologues. Pound's observation should provoke Eliot's qualification, which should provoke Pound's counter.

Method

1. Read the poem. The source of truth is 01 - Poem/soft_power_v2.md. If the user specifies a scene name or number, focus on that scene. Otherwise critique the full poem.

2. Read the existing analysis for context on known issues:

   Read ANALYSIS.md
   

3. Read any prior critique documents in 01 - Poem/Rewrites/ and Documents/ to avoid repeating what has already been said. Build on prior critiques, don't duplicate them.

4. Apply the full critical apparatus:

   • Melopoeia — Is the rhythm earned? Scan key lines. Show where metre does work and where it's slack.
   • Phanopoeia — Is the image concrete and necessary? "Go in fear of abstractions."
   • Logopoeia — Where does the language surprise? Where is it merely clever?
   • Condensare — Flag every word that doesn't earn its place.
   • Objective correlative — Is the emotion caused by the arrangement of images, or asserted by the narrator?
   • Impersonality — Where does the poet disappear into the work, and where does he intrude?
   • Auditory imagination — Does the sound of the verse penetrate below conscious thought?

Output Format

Structure the dialogue in numbered sections with clear headings:

1. Opening exchange — General verdict on the scene/poem (what it achieves, what prevents it from achieving more)
2. What Holds — The best passages, quoted and analysed in dialogue
3. What Needs Attention — Weaknesses, quoted, with diagnosis and prescription
4. Metrical Audit — Scan 4-6 key lines, showing where rhythm works and where it falters
5. Specific Prescriptions — Numbered list of concrete edits (before/after where possible)
6. Closing Remarks — One exchange summarising the canto's place in the poem

Use **POUND:** and **ELIOT:** as speaker tags. Use > blockquotes for poem quotations. Use standard scansion notation for metrical analysis.