NOTES


Note 7: page 41























Note 8: page 45





Note 9: page 46



Note 10: page 46

Note 11: page 47





Note 12: page 47






Note 13: page 51


Restoring the lines simply shifts the field of operation of the problematic from
global (and more profound) to local (and more immediately frustrating) disrup-
tions. If Blake did plan to re-insert the lines it was in order to shift local strategy
within his larger poetic program, not to regress to a less subversive text.
 7 This form of perspective is an expression of an attitude so widespread that it
 can be found among writers who usually emphasize more flexible forms of
 perspective and bodily experience. Alfred North Whitehead characterizes
 "perspective" as involving an "elimination" of a multiplicity of details in Process
 and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology (Originally published 1929. Reprint ed. New
 York: Harper & Row, 1957), p. 353. Maurice Merleau-Ponty refers to a logic
 "which assigns to each object its determinate features in virtue of those of the rest,
 and which [features] 'cancel out' as unreal all stray data," in The Phenomenology of
 Perception, trans. Colin Smith (New York: Humanities Press, 1974), p. 313. Ernest
 Schachtel locates perspective as a force that focuses attention on a detail by
 "exclud[ing]...the rest of the field," in Metamorphosis: On the Development of Affect,
 Perception, Attention, and Memory (New York: Basic Books, 1959), p. 253. Even
 Paul Ricoeur, in "The Model of the Text: Meaningful Action Considered as a
 Text," in Understanding and Social Inquiry, ed. Fred R. Dallmayr and Thomas A.
 McCarthy (Notre Dame and London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1977),
 summarizes reading as a form of perspective that Blake's narrative subverts: "Like
 a cube, or a volume in space, the text presents a 'relief.' Its different topics are not at
 the same altitude. Therefore the reconstruction of the whole has a perspectivist
 aspect similar to that of perception.... A specific kind ofonesidedness is implied in
 the act of reading," pp. 329-30.
 8 E, p. 740, 819; the original reading-"I have hidden thee Enion in Jealous
Despair" -rather than the revised "I have hidden Jerusalem in Silent Contrition"
not only obscures Enion's relation to (initially her identity with) the hidden female
but displaces/represses its cause away from explicit sexual jealousy, which then
surfaces in Enion's response.
 9 This reading was first suggested to me by Elizabeth Vaughan as a parody of
the Biblical "I am," which turned out to be confirmed by Blake's revisions. See
note 10, below.
 10 E, p. 740, 819: originally reading, "I am become a Victim to the Living I hide
in secret [.]" Compare to Urizen's ponderous decrees, "I am God" (12:8, 23).
 Another possible reading of these lines, also suggested by Elizabeth Vaughan
which opens up because of Blake's indeterminate syntax but which is more diffi-
cult to perceive and sustain, would have Jerusalem removing Enion from Thar-
mas' soul, by inserting punctuation Blake omits: "O Enion / Why has thou
taken[,] sweet Jerusalem[,] from my inmost Soul[?]"
 12 In the 1982 edition at line 4:13, Erdman substitutes "Jerusalem" for "Enithar-
mon" which he says is emendedd on the editorial assumption that Blake acciden-
tally neglected making the same change here as in lines 9 and 11, and 5:7" (E, p.
819). Each of these changes was not the "same" change, however, and the shift to
"Jerusalem" in 4:13 radically alters the textual problematic Blake is attempting to
enact at the poem's outset. I have therefore left the line as Blake left it.
 The massive revisions at this point in the text render it indeterminate whether
this is Tharmas speaking or not. Though in one sense it seems unlikely that he
could shift his groaning tone so suddenly to calm, almost soothing definitions, it
makes perfect sense as a defensive gesture in the face of his wracking self-division.
I assume in the main argument that it is Tharmas' voice that has undergone