I want to say that while Jennifer's remarks were sharp, they were
not either prejudicial or wild. She is knowledgeable and makes a
valid contrast. It is not simply a matter of mixing commentary with
sources; it is the quality she addressed.
On 6 May 2003, at 15:18, Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Rick,
> It seems to me that your question had to do with
> the mix or ratio of commentary to information.
> It seems to me that Williamson got the mix about
> right, esp. for a beginner. YOUR intended audience
> may be different. As for Jennifer's wildly prejudicial
> remarks as to the quality of Williamson's work, well,
> they leave me smiling, but I don't think they are
> pertinent to what you are trying to accomplish.
> Some people have absolutely no concept of what it's
> like for 1st year students, esp. when confronted
> with strange beasties like Eliot. Williamson is/was
> not one of those people.
> As for the oh so sad case of F.O. Matthieson, I have never
> heard anything but very high praise for his work, and I have
> always found that work most illuminating, but I'm
> not so sure he had the right information/commentary mix
> for porpoises such as yours. I think he was assuming his
> reader was much more familiar with the work than Williamson
> Perhaps if we are to be helpful to you, you might define
> the task a little more fully. That might also help us
> carry on in our wildly prejudical ways in a different thread
> altogether, and not be such a nuisance to your excellent
> Dr. Peter C. Montgomery
> Dept. of English
> Camosun College
> 3100 Foul Bay Rd.
> Victoria, BC CANADA V8P 5J2
> [log in to unmask]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rickard A. Parker [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 12:30 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: George Williams (was Annotation)
> Peter Montgomey wrote:
> > If you are looking for a madel as far as
> > commentary goes, why not try Williamson. He
> > seems to have just the right mix.
> Jennifer Formichelli wrote:
> > Do you mean George Williamson, author of A Reader's Guide to T.S.
> > Eliot? His commentary (not the same thing at all as editorial
> > commentary) strikes me as a mix of wildly prejudicial remarks
> > andthoughtless restatements of the words of the poems couched in
> > meaningless prose.
> Were you maybe thinking of F.O. Matthiessen?
> He added much to my appreciation of Eliot.
> At any rate I'll checkout both.
> Rick Parker