Julius' intro is far more nuanced than I had understood his book to be, from second-hand accounts. The intro. makes me more inclined to read the book.
(i) I'm always suspicious of critics who say, "I started researching this book to praise my subject, but ended up compelled to criticize him." It is a common persuasive device, but I wonder what would have caused Julius to undertake a project in defense of Eliot? The essay is a little muddy on that. In any case, even if he's using an insincere devise, his arguments will stand or fall independent of that.
(ii) I wonder what he thinks of The Cantos?