So why not tell us who Ryder is and why it matters? I go on finding
Eliot fascinating because I constantly find that I am understanding him
in new and different ways, and the appearance of the facsimile, then the
letters and Gordon and Seymour-Jones and then _March Hare_ and now
Rainey's _Annotated Waste Land_ and reconstruction of the chronology of
the poem's composition and the dating of fragments make it a constant
No one who relies only on criticism prior to the 90's or on Eliot's own
self-representations (mask[s]) is having nearly as interesting a poet I
>>> [log in to unmask] 09/07/05 1:00 PM >>>
You are right, of course. One should not indulge such impulses.
On the other hand, I do not think they are harmful, if formulated
For example, I suspect that 95 percent of the current subscribers to
the TSE list have no idea who Edward Ryder or, for that matter, his son
"was" or "is".
Some may be tempted to find out and it will not harm them if they
There was a time in my life when I was quite receptive to Eliot's
poetry and prose.
Now, at 71, I find his opus arid and stilted.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: Echoes of Eliot
> Dear Gunnar and Jacek,
> You are right about the nonsense, but you are on the list. Please
> engage in starting conversation on something about Eliot that is
> interesting and not simply reiterating old ideas or making personal
> remarks. It is not enough to get on and note that others have failed:
> provide some sense please.
>>>> [log in to unmask] 09/07/05 9:57 AM >>>
> Bravissimo, Gunnar Jauch!
> The words that come to mind almost every time one clicks on the the
> "forum" messages these days come from Edward Ryder, Charles Ryder's
> "There is no news, of course. Such a lot of nonsense."
> Jacek Niecko
> Washington DC
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gunnar Jauch" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 9:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Echoes of Eliot
>> am 7.9.05 11:45 Uhr schrieb Peter Montgomery unter
> [log in to unmask]:
>>> future is not what it used to be, and it is now possible to predict
>>> the past in many scientific senses.
>> Bla bla bla.