Jennifer Formichelli wrote:
>
> Regarding the epigraph, Eliot did not fret about it; where does he
> fret? Pound writes to him about it, and Eliot replies he has replaced
> it with the Petronius, 'or something like it' (there's a cryptic
> comment for you). And you will recall that Pound almost withdrew his
> insinuation about the epigraph all together: 'Who I am to grudge him
> his laurel crown?' , telling Eliot to 'do as you like'.


One account of Eliot's "fret" (TWL: A Facsimile ...  p. 125)

    Pound: "I doubt if Conrad is weighty enough to stand the citation."

    Eliot: "Do you mean not use the Conrad quote or simply not put
    Conrad's name to it?  It is much the most appropriate I can find,
    and somewhat elucidative."

    Pound: "Do as you like about Conrad; who am I to grudge him his laurel
    crown?"



> And he did: he
> chose the far superior, far more rich, Petronius. If you like, I can,
> at some point, when I don't have to go to work, describe exactly why I
> think the epigraph Eliot selected is far superior to the one he
> expunged.


Jennifer, please do send this in.  I lean the other way but whenever
I try to reason it out or write why I just can't do it.


> And how, most of all, could such a unity be 'constructed' by
> excision?

Sun, moon, puppy, stars, candle

Regards,
    Rick Parker