I take note of the reiteration.


Date sent:              Sun, 29 Sep 2002 12:03:11 -0700
Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
From:                   Francis Gavin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: Some Queries, was Re: Deluge...
To:                     [log in to unmask]

No. They were indeterminately diagnosed symptoms about what he may
or may not have been undergoing at that time. Which is why things are no
longer classified that way. I reiterate.

GAVIN



on 9/28/02 8:09 PM, Nancy Gish at [log in to unmask] wrote:

> You may be talking about what psychiatry says now.  I was and am
> talking about what they said when Eliot both represented it and had a
> psychiatrist for therapy because of his "breakdown."  If I recall, that
> is what started this discussion.  In any case it did mean something
> quite specific to call him neurasthenic.  There were clear symptoms that
> referred to, and he had them. Nancy
>
>
>
> Date sent:              Sat, 28 Sep 2002 17:14:37 -0700
> Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
> <[log in to unmask]> From:                   Francis Gavin
> <[log in to unmask]> Subject:                Re: Some Queries, was
> Re: Deluge... To:                     [log in to unmask]
>
> I don't care what they meant then we're talking about what they mean
> now--which is essentially nothing since they were too general.
> Describing Eliot as "neurasthenic" means nothing, as it once may have
> meant what seemed like something but was really in fact nothing.
>
> GAVIN
>
>
>
>
>
> on 9/28/02 12:37 PM, Nancy Gish at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry, but if you want a long list of medical articles from the
>> period that say quite differently, let me know.  At the turn of the
>> century and up to and through the war, "hysteria" was a broad term that
>> did indeed include shell shock and what we would call post-traumatic
>> stress.  I only said "neurasthenia" was hard to distinguish, and there
>> is a long text making that claim and giving charts of differences that
>> then got quoted by many doctors.  On this you are factually wrong as to
>> what the terms meant then. As I spent many, many weeks reading on this
>> at the Bodlian last year, I am quite certain of my terminology. Cheers,
>> Nancy
>>
>>
>> Date sent:              Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:13:58 -0700
>> Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
>> <[log in to unmask]> From:                   Francis Gavin
>> <[log in to unmask]> Subject:                Re: Some Queries,
>> was Re: Deluge... To:                     [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Both neurasthenia and hysteria are considered quaint antiquated terms
>> in medical circles. Hysteria is sometimes used in a very limited way to
>> describe disassociation in personality formation, neurasthenia not at
>> all. Neither one has anything to do with battle fatigue or PTSD, which
>> are in turn, two different things.
>>
>> GAVIN
>>
>>
>> on 9/28/02 10:26 AM, Nancy Gish at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>
>>> "Shell Shock" is what they called hysteria and we
>>> would probably call post-traumatic stress disorder.  In any case,
>>> there was a very extensive literature on it that actually goes back a
>>> couple of thousand years to ancient Egypt.  Vittoz specifically wrote
>>> on "neurasthenia."