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  March 2003

TSE March 2003

Subject:

Re: Re : Eliot and Lawrence

From:

Vishvesh Obla <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

T. S. Eliot Discussion forum.

Date:

Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:18:08 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (234 lines)

“I don't remember the orignal question which generated
this thread, Seems to me it queried the disjuncture
between E. and L. The above seem to indicate possible
reasons therefor”

Dear Professor,

Thanks for elucidating your response in detail. The
issue that I raised was how Eliot being an artist of
the greatest kind could be so much prejudiced in his
understanding of Lawrence, that too when they
apparently seem to have had similar interests in their
quest for the greater possibilities of life and react
similarly in their negation of modern civilization.  I
was trying to make inferences if his comments threw
light on the nature of his artistic genius itself. You
seem to think that there is enough justification in
the quotes themselves to ‘indicate possible reasons’,
and have substantiated it with your response.  I
differ there and I will try to jot down my thoughts on
it before long.  Thanks again.

vishvesh

--- Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> A great set of quotes. Thank you.
> 1. I agree that Lawrence has no sense of humour.
>    No big deal.
> 2. I also agree that Lawrence was as much an
> anti-intellectual
>    snob, as Eliot was an intellectual snob. So much
> the loss
>    for both of them. Therein, however, may lie the
> root of
>    your question of the disapprobation between them.
> Lawrence
>    is confessedly and commitedly rural and animal.
> Eliot the same
>    but urban and intellectual. Their values and
> preferences are
>    prone to mutual rejection, rather than
> cross-fertilisation.
>    Perhaps a pity.
> 3. All agree. Lawrence was intutitive. Eliot wasn't.
> In fact
>    I strongly believe one could make a case for
> Eliot's com-
>    plete rejection of intuition, as a life skill and
> as an
>    artistic support. More fertiliser for mutual
> alienation.
>    Lawrence's intuitiveness is consistent with his
> ruralness
>    and animal orientation.
> 4. Did Lawrence have a sexual morbidity in his work?
>    "The Horse Dealer's Daughter" has evidence pro.
> THE RAINBOW
>    the opposite. Obviously not to Eliot's taste. In
> fact
>    neither sex nor death were subjects to Eliot's
> taste. Perhaps
>    they offended his streak on New Emgland
> puritanism. More
>    ground for disapprobation on Eliot's part.
> 5. A work of art.... Probably not by the 1920s
> standards
>    of Vorticism, Cubism &c. No real exploration of
> the medium.
>    Strict focus on content. No interest in the
> cutting edge
>    of how to uses the senses in language.
>    By the 19th century Romantic standards,
> Lawrence's work
>    probably does qualify as art, but ELiot's every
> interest was
>    in getting away from that.
> 6. Profound insights rather than ratiocinative
> powers... see
>    #3. above.
> 7. That Lawrence had to struggle to get his good
> stuff out is a
>    fair evaluation by Eliot. Eliot had a similar
> struggle, he
>    just had the good sense to through the bad stuff
> away.
> 8. Lawrence's anti-religious attitude no doubt would
> not
>    be comfortable in the same room with Eliot's
> proreligous
>    attitude (which is typically patronising. My Dad
> also was
>    an Anglican, and I see interesting resonances of
> a similar
>    character in Eliot.) This point alone would be
> enough to
>    alienate the two from each other, in themselves
> and through
>    thier critics.
> 9. Lawrence's mother. E.'s remarks rather remind of
> of E. on Blake.
>    E. was marvellous at slotting in others'
> inadequacies of
>    religious trait. I am gravely tempted to
> attribute this
>    tendency to his Anglicanism as well, for the
> reasons cited in #8
>    above.
> 10. I don't remember the orignal question which
> generated this thread,
>    Seems to me it queried the disjuncture between E.
> and L.
>    The above seem to indicate possible reasons
> therefor.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter.
> Dr. Peter C. Montgomery
> Dept. of English
> Camosun College
> 3100 Foul Bay Rd.
> Victoria, BC CANADA V8P 5J2
> [log in to unmask]
> www.camosun.bc.ca/~peterm
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vishvesh Obla [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 2:22 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re : Eliot and Lawrence
>
>
> Here are some quotes I managed to type(They are from
> Leavis' book: D.H.Lawrence: novelist.  I dont have
> the
> original source)
>
> "Lawrence has three aspects, and it is very
> difficult
> to do justice to all.  I do not expect to be able to
> do so.  The first is the ridiculous: his lack of a
> sense of humour, a certain snobbery, a lack not so
> much of information as of the critical faculties
> which
> education should give, and an incapacity for what we
> ordinarily call thinking.  ...secondly there is the
> extraordinarily keen sensibility and capacity for
> profound intuition - intuition from which he
> commonly
> he drew the wrong conclusion.  Third, there is a
> distinct sexual morbidity". (After Strange Gods)
>
> "He never succeeded in making a work of art"
> (criterion)
>
> "He was an impatient and impulsive man (or so I
> imagine him to have been; for, like the author of
> the
> book, I never knew him).  He was a man of fitful and
> profound insights, rather than of rationcinative
> powers; and therefore he was an impatient man; he
> expressed some of his insights in the form least
> likely to make them acceptable to most of his
> contemporaries, and sometimes in a form which almost
> willfully encouraged misunderstanding...Wrong as he
> often was (I think) from ignorance, prejudice, or
> drawing the wrong conclusions in his conscious mind
> form the insights which came to him from below
> consciousness: it will take time to dissociate the
> superficial error from the fundamental truth.  To
> me,
> also, he seems often to write very badly: but to be
> a
> writer who had to write often badly in order to
> write
> something well.  As for his religious attitude... we
> can
> now begin to see how much was ignorance, rather than
> hostility; for Lawrence was an ignorant man in the
> sense that he was unaware of how much he did not
> know... "
>
> Of Lawrence's mother:
> "Vague hymn-singing pietism...which does not seem to
> have provided her with any firm principles by which
> to
> scrutinize the conduct of her sons".(Foreword to
> D.H.Lawrence and Human Existence, by Fr. William
> Tiverton)
>
>
>
> --------------------------
>
> Peter Montgomery  wrote:I don't see anything wrong
> with being provocative.All ideas need to be
> challenged. My concern iswith the generalities,
> which
> imply that Eliot had anegative attitude to Lawrence.
> Fine. I agree that heprobably did. All I want is to
> see some of thestatements on which your, possibly
> valid, assertionis made.I haven't looked at that
> side
> of Eliot recently, so I'mnot familiar with the
> literature. How about a quote ortwo. Seems to me
> that
> Eliot was consistent with hisoriginal assertions in
> After Strange Gods that modernwriters like Lawrence,
> and I think he even cited Pound,crreated characters
> who lacked real will. They arepeople to whom things
> happen. He got Pound flippingmad on that subject,
> and
> as I remember they carriedon an endless
> correspondence
> in NEW about it. Nowthe question is, to what degree
> was Eliot influencedby another writer with his own
> anti-semetic bonesin his closet, Percy Wyndham Lewis
> and his book,MEN WITHOUT ART in which he tore into a
> numberof writers (including Eliot whom he called a
> PSEUDOIST)in some cases because they created
> characters wholacked executive will and
> intelligence.
> He drove Hemingwayto utter destructiveness with that
> criticism. Ol' Pappytore Shakespeare and Company to
> bits when he read that.Seems to me those are really
> important qurestions.So there. I've put some minimal
>
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

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

November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
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