am 27.9.2002 10:21 Uhr schrieb Temur Kobakhidze unter [log in to unmask]:
> Dear Nancy,
> Did I really say that? Personality does matter, but not so
> overwhelmingly:)) And when one dislikes both the poet and his personality,
> you just say one dislikes both. As simple as that.
> It seems, TSE's way of life was part of his poetical perception of the
> world. You won't be able to write Four Quartets unless you are a highbrow
> intellectual and a conservative, at least to an extent:-). And to the same
> extent disliking the personality does mean disliking the potry. Although
> the personality and the poetry are by no means interchangeable.
> To say we are impersonal is just a curious way of asserting that our
> personality is more deeply involved: the thought is Cleanth Brooks's if my
> memory serves me right.
> On Sep 26 2002, Nancy Gish - Women's Studies wrote:
>> Dear Temur,
>> Quite apart from the issue of what Kate said, why does one need
>> to like Eliot's personality to have a passionate interest in his
you don't seem to understand what Nancy is reiterating: The personality of
an artist, in this case of a poet, is of minor interest; what matters is
There are many examples:
E.M. Forster had a strange private life, in Kipling's biography "The Long
Recessional" one learns about some of his not wholly commendable views and
actions. In "Life with Picasso" Françoise Gilot tells us about Picasso, an
egomaniac and an unpredictable macho. That does not change the fact that
they all were touched by a common genius.
A fabulous exhibit MATISSE/PICASSO, a huge juxtaposition of major works by
the two giants of modern art, has just opened in the Grand Palais of Paris.
It will be shown in the Tate Modern in January and later in the MOMA. Don't
A prerequisite to write such a masterpiece as 4Q is not merely "highbrow
intellectuality", but mainly knowledge, spirituality, belief and deep
wisdom. I fail to see what you mean by "conservative", in my view nothing
but a generalizing, superficial and useless term in any context.