As we both know, Eliot himself gave immense credit to Pound in shaping
the poem, and many many scholars have seen it as a form of authorial
contribution because of its great extent and its impact on how the poem
has been read (as did Pound himself apparently, given his midwife role),
so shifting to the passive voice is not an argument.
>>> [log in to unmask] 09/12/05 12:36 PM >>>
As I stated to Nancy, I very much doubt your claim:
> The elimination of "this stuff" (a good label for
> it) makes Pound nearly
> co-author of the poem.
Since Pound did not himself eliminate anything from
TWL, this is quite exaggerated. He acted as editor,
giving Eliot suggestions and advice; Eliot himself
decided what to expunge, retain or alter. Many poems
have been edited in this fashion (here we have the MS
evidence, of course), but such criticism--when the
author himself makes final decisions-- is not normally
considered an authorial contribution.
Regarding your other remark,
> Has any critic ever speculated why Eliot chose "such
> stuff" for his first
> effort at producing heroic couplets?
TWL is not Eliot's first or only attempt at couplets.
'The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock' has quite a few
heroic--or rather, unheroic--couplets.