From: Carrol Cox

Without strong evidence to the contrary I would assume that it was not a
question of "resistance," strong or weak, but of recognition of good
advice.

In other words, I still assume that if we are dealing with "intentions,"
then the text an author signs his/her name to carries those intentions.
Eliot from the beginning intended the poem as published. Pound helped
him see more clearly what he had intended all along.
========================================================
You're bolder than I am, Carrol. Two assumptions.

I did use the word "uncharacteristic". Are you aware of
other such collaborative efforts?

I will agree that by putting his name to it he took
full responsibility for it. I'm not at all sure he
had ANY intentions for any of the products of the
original (alpha?) creative process. Given the metaphor
of the catalyst in T&IT, intention is almost an unacceptable
word, even if hard to avoid.

In the editorial process (beta?), intention is a much
more necessary word. There are lots of conscious,
deliberative, non-mediated (catalyst) decisions by
P.,E., and V. E.'s acceptance of those decisions,
doesn't qualify the ones he didn't make himself,
as intended. They didn't come from his creative
processes either alpha or beta. So if one is
trying to get at what he himself really created
or intended, there is still much of an open question.

His acceptance of such a radically different version
of the work, based on an aesthetic so radically dif-
ferent from his own, still remains for me a big question.
He may haved seen it as a better work aqnd Pound as the
better maker, but that is just a guess. Given the assiduous
care he took with all his other work, I still find his
unargumentative aquiesence uncharacteristic.

Cheers,
Peter