And to understand TSE's poetic method involved in "connections" of this
sort one need only read TSE's introduction to St John Perse's "Anabasis".
Traditional connection does not occur except mechanically through adjacency.
Instead one or both of two things can then happen in the reader's mind.
a) the written adhacent lines in total can trigger a separate and
largely unrelated new idea, i.e. the poet may deliberately trip
a cultural set of assumptions;
b) the written lines can be amalgamated into a "super" idea.
Use of actual literary connective devices would prevent the intuitive leap
of imagination in the reader's mind that results in either or both of the
above. This intuitive leap of imagination and understanding is part of the
enjoyment of modern poetry. The reader, however, must have confidence in
his/her "leap" and such only comes from experience in reading poetry.
Note these intuitive leaps are directed and controlled by the poet. They
are not, repeat not, at the discretion of the reader. I am not advocating
the "Well, I don't care what you think, this is what this poem means to
me" school of reading modern poetry. The poet had a vision. Staying
alone with his/her vision does not produce poetry. The poet needs a
reader/listener in order to realize the vision. It is the task of the poet
to control and direct the building of that vision in the reader's mind. It
is the task of the reader to read in such a way as to allow this to happen.
I think this is what Marcia means by the contract between the poet and the
McIntosh, NM, USA
From: Jennifer Formichelli <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 6:49 AM
Subject: Was Re: Carbuncular/ Now Consecutive Lines
> May I venture one connection: the last three lines you quote are all
>lines of songs. However, we don't need to write essays about the
>Eliot has made it. They are consecutive lines in TWL.