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:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TSE Home

TSE Home

TSE  May 2003

TSE May 2003

Subject:

Re: An amateur Eliot enthusiast's wild musing

From:

Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

T. S. Eliot Discussion forum.

Date:

Tue, 13 May 2003 21:15:46 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (242 lines)

Yes, depending on how you read "limiting" and how much you see later
authors interpreting Aristotle. But then Aristotle is the mind who explained
that the female is a defective male, created by a failed reproduction
process, so we have to acknowledge his own limits. Brilliant minds are
not the minds of gods.
Nancy


Date sent: Tue, 13 May 2003 18:07:11 -0700
Send reply to: "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
From: Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: An amateur Eliot enthusiast's wild musing
To: [log in to unmask]

From: Nancy Gish [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
 I think poetry cannot be limited by theories.
=================================================
Didn't Aristotle (or at least the student who took
notes at his talks), get away with it for a fairly
lengthy period? ;->

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: Nancy Gish [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 7:01 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: An amateur Eliot enthusiast's wild musing


Dear Vishvesh,

I think one kind of poetry may be a sublimation of oneself. But poetry is
far bigger and grander than any one definition. Eliot's own "impersonal"
theory of poetry does not account for what he wrote himself, and I think
of contemporary poets whose personal experience is central in far more
complex and interesting ways than "confessional" or simply personal. I
think poetry cannot be limited by theories. Nancy



Date sent: Tue, 13 May 2003 05:44:08 -0700
Send reply to: "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
<[log in to unmask]>
From: Vishvesh Obla <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: An amateur Eliot enthusiast's wild musing To:
                   [log in to unmask]

Dave,

I appreciate your sincere wish to understand
Literature. You have raised a couple of issues that
interest me since they seem to me to reflect a common
pattern of one's understanding of Literature.

"What is poetry, if not something for aiding us in
forming our own sort of outlook -- something to help
us make sense of an essentially senseless
environment?"

Well, poetry could be anything for anyone, but I guess
it primarily is a cultural expression. It fulfils its
purpose only in relation to the culture that made it
possible. Eliot relates this 'culture' aspect to what
he calls as the European 'tradition' from which the
English literary tradition is derived. To read poetry
is to live culturally. One doesn't read poetry to
'make sense of an essentially senseless environment'
nor is one a poet when he offers aids to make 'sense'
of a social environment. When one does that, what is
offered is an 'idea', to quote a Lawrentian term, an
idea that nevertheless may have truth behind it, but a
truth that has only a 'personal' force and not the
essential poetic force. If Virginia Woolf has to be
related to her feministic ideas for a better
understanding, then I would seriously doubt her value
as a great novelist. Tolstoy is so much an artist in
'Anna Karenina' than his 'Resurrection', for the
creative force behind the former is not governed by
any 'ideas', while in the latter they are the driving
force and hence stand in his way of his wholesome
'artistic' conception of life. Please don't mistake
me as an advocate of the stupid 'art for art's sake'
slogan. I think Life as related by art has a much
more permanent value than when it is related to an
'idea'.

One is a poet when one is able to sublimate one's
personal experiences into what poetry essentially
stands for. In such a case, the associated details
become important only when one wants to magnify (or
reduce) a poem.

vishvesh

--- Dave Martin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Vishvesh:
>
> I appreciate the sentiment.
>
> All the same, I like to "know my sources". I have
> never been one to
> fully subscribe to or fully reject the
> post-modernist arguments about
> author's intent, that is, its essential irrelevance.
> Maybe I am reading
> into your note (ha!) but I hear a little of this
> spirit in your reply.
>
> Whether or not Eliot was gay does not impact my
> opinion of him as a
> great poet. It could, however, help to inform my
> understanding of his
> work and his general outlook on life. What is
> poetry, if not something
> for aiding us in forming our own sort of outlook --
> something to help us
> make sense of an essentially senseless environment?
> I may be mistaken,
> but it was my understanding that this was the great
> pursuit of the
> so-called 'Modernists', amongst which Eliot is
> generally considered a
> great standard bearer... I think, for example, there
> are a lot of folks
> out there that would think it silly for one to
> ignore the feminist/gay
> slant to Woolf's writing, even if you were to argue
> that she never wrote
> such themes into her work 'with intent'.
>
> Group: please advise!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vishvesh Obla [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 7:33 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: An amateur Eliot enthusiast's wild
> musing
>
>
> "I read in a New Yorker article (by Louis Menand)
> last
> fall that a group of scholars -- on somewhat thin
> evidence -- believe that Eliot was gay and had a
> lover
> while in Paris: Jean Verdenal..."
>
> ------------
>
> 'Eliot was gay; shakespheare was gay; Henry James
> was
> impotent; Lawrence suffered from Oedipus complex' :
> when I read academic discussions of great writers, I
> feel totally at a loss when someone drags in a
> personal issue as the above even when they could be
> real. I remember Eliot himself quoting somewhere on
> some earlier critics of Shakepheare that they were
> much closer to his dramatic art than much of the
> later
> critics since they could focus at the essential
> spirit
> of his works without getting entangled in the
> 'academism' which seems to be the malady of the
> modern
> mind.
>
> I would appreciate if anyone here attempts to look
> at
> a poem for what it is and not for the innumerable
> details which, I feel, make a poem anything but a
> poem.
>
> Vishvesh
>
> "Trust the tale, not the artist..."
> -D.H.Lawrence
>
> --- "David B. Martin 00"
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > RE: Prufrock...
> >
> > Why is the fog/smoke yellow? Mustard gas? I read
> in
> > a New Yorker article (by Louis Menand) last fall
> > that a group of scholars -- on somewhat thin
> > evidence -- believe that Eliot was gay and had a
> > lover while in Paris: Jean Verdenal. The Prufrock
> > collection was apparently dedicated to Verdenal in
> > 1917, after his death at Gallipoli. According to
> > these scholars, Eliot thought he had died of
> > drowning. Other scholars have read Verdenal into
> the
> > Phoeban sailor of _The Waste Land_. But it seems
> > to me that the publish date, 1922, of The Waste
> Land
> > would have been far too late to nurse a wounded
> > heart in public, published form -- am I naive in
> > thinkin this? I have to wonder if all the water
> > imagery, and the yellow smoke, and the eternal
> > Footman, etc were not all musings and memorials to
> > the death of his friend and/or lover Jean.
> > Prufrock's publish date of 1917 would seem to
> > support my private little theory, but this
> >
> (http://www.camdenfamily.com/thunder/timeline.html)
> > website's tim!
> > eline claims a completion date in 1912. Did he
> > spend the five year balance completing the
> remaining
> > poems, refining the eponymous poem, or just
> involved
> > with other pursuits? Besides, do we have hard
> > evidence that he did not completely rewrite the
> poem
> > in 1917 anyways? Any Eliot scholars out there
> care
> > to respond?
> >
> > D
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.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

October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
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