Let's face it, M. was a muscle man.
From my little knowledge of his career,
I gather he much preferred sculpting to painting,
so when he was forced to paint, he did it in the
style of sculpture, ie. tried to get a 3D effect.
It is only our 20th Century predilection for portraits
women without muscles which causes us surprise
to see that they actually do have the wherewithall
to move, do &c.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jam" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: 'The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock'
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Montgomery" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 8:38 PM
> Subject: Re: 'The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock'
> > From: cr mittal
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 6:49 PM
> > Subject: Re: 'The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock'
> > Yes, there's an ironic dimension to this repeated harping on
> > "Michaelangelo". (The italian sculptor made masculine figures
> > of enviable virility and strength.) It's an ironic dig at Prufrock's
> > emasculated body. No wonder, he becomes too self-conscious
> > and suffers the shame of "wriggling on the wall" like a worm.
> > =============================
> > Is that emasculated or ematiated?
> > P.
> First, my apologies for jumping into this thread--and for responding to an
> older post.
> In consideration of the "ironic" emasculating / ematiating effect of M's
> virile, strong male figures, how might considering M's female (yet equally
> virile) figures complicate the verse's repetition?
> P.S. After reviewing the poem tonight, I was reminded of Salieri's
> benediction in _Amadeus_ when, as the self-appointed saint of mediocrity,
> blessed the madhouse's population.
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.1/327 - Release Date: 4/28/2006