I guess it depends on the kind of armor.
David Boyd <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Have heard that there does definitely exist written evidence very strongly indicative of Mary Trevelyan proposing marriage to Eliot or at least expecting such a proposal from him. Pre- Valerie, of course, but, with hindsight, a very strong case of 'amor vincit omnia'?
>Sent from my iPad
>On 22 Feb 2013, at 07:55, P <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> If he did such harm, Barry Super did not let on. The only hint of anything was that one of his two Papal rosaries which was intended for Ms. T. was used by big E. when the other one broke. No doubt she shepherded E. into Anglo-Catholicism in a full and meaningful way, on even the smallest of details. I have seen reference to her having proposed to him twice but haven't seen any solid evidence for it, although it seems entirely believable. I suspect Eliot was enthralled by the mysteries of her religion, which can't fail to generate a bond (cf Sts. T of A & J. of the X), which could easily be mistaken for a different kind of intimacy. Whatever his other virtues, E. was intensely single minded.
>> P. M.
>> Peter Dillane <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Hi Carrol, Ken, Nancy et al
>>> I am not animated one way nor the other about a personal response to the author.
>>> I find it hard to reliably experience one.
>>> I like Piaf's observation that you only know a man once you have slept with him. I am not convinced that the candour of poetry approaches this.
>>> I like Anne Porter when I read "For My Son Johnny" - but the author of the Waste Land doesn't offer a restricted and internally corroborated set of personal traits as that lovely poem does.
>>> By the by I think his treatment of Hale Hayward and Trevelyan is just the way of the world. Relationships are mostly characterised by an inequality of devotion and unthinking indifference. He doesn't seem to have been wilfully malicious and certainly no more manipulative than most of those not besotted. I am not saying he did no great harm by the way.