On Friday, May 2, 2003, at 06:19 PM, Peter Montgomery 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.
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. Here's a random sample (p. 132): 'The speaker's need
for clairvoyance introduces Madame Sosostris; [...]'. Preposterous is
what I say to that. What a load of wallop. Or how about this, on
The play is, however, an extension of his achievement in the second
half of The Waste Land, adapting the vulgar speech and neurasthenic
atmosphere to the unctuous superstition of a prostitute world.
The book of sources written by Southam is the standard, and is far
superior to any of the stale and preemptory statements Williams
musters. Do you really recommend this book to your students?
PS. Please excuse me if this is not the author you meant.