_O my love,_ _Like a cornfield in summer_ _Is your body to me;_ _Golden and bending with the wind,_ _And on the tallest ear a bird is piping_ _The lonely song._ _And scarlet poppies thread the golden ways._ _Out of the purple haze of the sea behind it_ _Appears a white ship sailing,_ _And its passengers are harvesters._ _But who dares sing of love?_ The jackals howl; the vultures gorge dead flesh. In despite of the last line, which is undoubtedly true, and, under the present circumstances, certainly necessary to the context of all that precedes it, yet I feel I cannot share Mr. Flint’s despair of this world. For as long as there is any poet who can have such visions as this is, in such a world as ours, the earth cannot be altogether given over to crime and slaughter. Which one of the Imagists could have given us with so direct and poignant sincerity—scorning all artifice—such a vision of beauty? Or, for that matter, which one of the poets of today? The Reader Critic What Is Anarchy? _Alan Adair, London_: In the March number of THE LITTLE REVIEW, Miss Alice Groff criticises Anarchy. She criticises it badly and unfairly. She writes as though she did not understand what anarchy is. Have you room in your paper for me to tell her? Anarchy is the name given to those periods in the life of a people during which the principle of domination is held in abeyance and men are no longer accountable to any magistracy. It is properly a political word. It has no philosophical significance. All it means is absence of material government. It is in that sense that Milton uses it and Swift uses it. It is in that sense that writers of history books employ it. It is a term, and the only correct term, for a certain condition of society. That condition has occurred in the past and will doubtless occur in the future. It is the result of an equality of strength among the different elements, or “social-egos” that make up a community. There is Anarchy only so long as these forces remain equal. Once they cease to be equal, so soon as one begins to tend towards dominance, so soon does the Anarchy end. According to the “social-ego” that has triumphed, the changed commonwealth becomes an oligarchy or a kingdom; a military republic, an ochlocracy or a federation of communes. But until then, while there is still absence of supreme coercive power, while there is still _no dominant “social-ego,”_ so long is the community correctly termed an Anarchy.