LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TSE Archives


TSE Archives

TSE Archives


TSE@PO.MISSOURI.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TSE Home

TSE Home

TSE  February 2003

TSE February 2003

Subject:

Re: T.S.Eliot and D.H.Lawrence

From:

"D.Gregory Griffith" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

T. S. Eliot Discussion forum.

Date:

Thu, 13 Feb 2003 12:33:08 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (69 lines)

Obla,
    I don't know if I would be so confident of Leavis's assertions; though I admit
I have not read his work on Lawrence. I have to go by what you detail in your
post and what I know of Eliot and Lawrence, a fair amount, and what I know
of Leavis, much less I'm afraid. However, I don't agree with the evaluation of
Eliot as a lesser artist than Lawrence for several reasons. First, Leavis, though
he was indeed an influential and important critic, was also the exponent of a
very specific type of criticism, one that focuses on both close attention to the
text, and one that uses the very criteria in the portion of your post that I include
below. It is a moral criteria that looks for and at life affirming or enhancing or
fulfilling values, or at least Leavis's version or definition of those values. There
are many other ways to judge art and/or artist, and again definitions of life
affirming are not monolithic. There also seems to be a hint of psychoanalysis
implied in asserting degrees of "intelligence born of  the whole integrated
psyche." There are those who might not agree with such critical approaches
and some critics who use "psychological approaches," broadly defined, might
not agree with a hierarchical evaluation of writers or their texts based on
their degree of psychic integration. I'm pretty mercenary in my critical approach,
or at least I think I am, and I'm not comfortable with the comparison of these
two figures in a ratings war, particularly not on the criteria Leavis seems to use
in your explanation and what I've read of and about him. I think he is right if
he asserts that Eliot was not a fan of Lawrence because E. was a person less
comfortable with the body, sensuality, and sexuality, and that hindered his
appreciation of Lawrence, but that's a guess  or an instinctive response on
my part rather than the product of any investigation. I'd also caution against
a theory "based particularly on Eliot's dramas and a few of his later critical
works." One could focus on certain aspects of Lawrence's work and perhaps
find his vision incomplete, and as Marcia has pointed out in another post,
Lawrence is an uneven writer from a number of perspectives. I think each
figure is a major writer, and that each has flaws and even bad individual
works.
    One final observation here, and you'll have to pardon me for shifting to
a less scholarly tone. I find it ironic that Leavis--an uptight conservative,
intellectual--is more or less saying Eliot is an inferior artist in comparison to
Lawrence because he (Eliot) is an uptight, conservative, intellectual. I
would assert, half in jest, that it's the similarity in personality, and critical
approach--both men favor a moral rubric for judging the arts, both look closely
at texts, and though Leavis seems unhappy with Eliot's vicious attacks on
Lawrence (or at least that's what I gather from your post), I've heard Leavis
was famous for his very mean attacks also--that allows Leavis to explain
correctly why Eliot reacts to Lawrence the way he does.

--Greg--

Obla Vishvesh wrote:

Leavis asserts that it is a “failure
of intelligence” as Henry James put it aptly, on the
character of Flaubert’s masterpiece Madame Bovary and
it is precisely the presence of intelligence, an
intelligence born of the whole integrated psyche that
characterizes the works of Lawrence. Lawrence was very
much against any life negating interests, for he had a
magnificent perception of life in its fullness and
lived from its sources than from the mind. The lack of
such “intelligence born of the whole integrated
psyche”, Leavis finds, makes him less of the
“representative in consciousness of the complex need
of the whole being”, and hence makes him a lesser
artist than Lawrence.  (And Leavis, a great critic
that he is, substantiates his statements by his
analysis of Eliot, particularly his dramas and a few
of his later critical works).   Comparison with
Lawrence aside, this, as Leavis points out, not only
stood in his way of understanding Lawrence, but also
let him malign Lawrence, and bestow greater importance
to James Joyce and Virginia Woolf.

>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



PO.MISSOURI.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager