Kate Troy wrote:

> The letter was quite telling.
>
> From it, superficially, one would take that he had an extremely
> romantic view of poor people.

It looked that way didn't it?


> In fact, he practically states outright that's it's too bad that there
> will be less and less poor people as they will either die off or the
> middle class will envelop them.

Oh, what do the simple folk do?


> As for wealthy folks (the aristocracy), according to Tom, they live in
> fear of the middle class The middle class themselves are morally
> corrupt and uninterested in and unable to appreciate any kind of true
> art or beauty.  Only the poor and rich are capable of true
> discrimination.

That seems to be a fair accessment of his views in the essay.


> The irony of it all is that he is elegizing an actress, an actress
> thank god who never degraded herself by making a movie, but yet, he
> wishes he had a movie of her to watch.

I catch the irony but I think what he meant was that there was a
filmed performance of her stage art or a documentary rather than using
her in a film which was a different art form.  It probably wouldn't
have suited Marie Lloyd anyway as the silent films would have missed
catching much of her comedy like the tone of her voice.


> In reality, Tom is mourning the dying class system.

I'll like to hear more from someone.


> Those terrible middle class persons, especially the American middle
> class, owning nice houses and cars and the latest technology,

In America wealth has a bigger part to play in deciding what class you
are considered to be in than it does in Europe. Going back a century
perhaps Carnegie could be used as an example.


> He probably became a British citizen because the class system in
> Britain lasted longer and had more influence than in America.

Certainly a better choice for a royalist.


> Poor Tom; he would positive loathe computers, cell phones, rock music.

But what about the rhythms of rap?


> however, if he was gay, he may have happily adjusted in the long run.

Yes (**if**), but maybe the openess on sexuality would have
counter-balanced that.

Regards,
    Rick Parker