Ken Armstrong wrote:

>I have to admit that when I saw the suggestion of a Bel Esprit scheme for 
>Debra San's four paragraphs, it was dispiriting. They were nice, but that's 
>all it takes? We don't require much, do we. And should much
>arrive....well, that takes us back to '98.
>
>Ken A.

Ken, a few comments:

1) Debra San's post on "Lune de Miel" was not her first post to the list, 
nor her first post of that quality. I save the TSE posts that I'm likely to 
want to reference again, and most of her posts make the "save" list. I'll 
bet Rick was reacting along the lines of "Hey, here's _another_ good post 
from Debra" -- I know that's how I reacted.

2) From what I've seen of lists in general, a list tends to get more of 
whatever is praised and less of whatever is ridiculed. So, it's a good thing 
for Rick and others to openly applaud on-topic, polite, well written, 
thoughtful posts on Eliot that foster discussion instead of electronic 
fist-fights.

3) Debra wrote that "there is a long literary and religious tradition in 
which 'Lune de Miel' seems to participate, and a consideration of this 
tradition may help when translating the poem." It seems to me that this 
comment presents "Lune de Miel" as a specific example of your statement last 
year that Eliot's poetry is basically religious poetry.

So, all things considered, no need to get dispirited, Ken, even if Guy Story 
Brown is the 'gold standard'.

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/