On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:31:49PM -0700, Peter Montgomery wrote:
> From: "George Carless" <[log in to unmask]>
> > >On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 06:27:19PM -0700, Peter Montgomery wrote:
> > > So who is the "you" to whom he is talking?
> > I didn't mean to leave this one hanging: the real world has been calling.
> > But a gloss that makes "you" and "I" the same person--Prufrock
> > the otherwise gramatically difficult "I" make a little more sense,
> > by drawing the reader's attention to the "I" and its awkwardness. It's a
> > more interesting than if the line had just been "let me go, then", and
> > there's an ambiguity which wouldn't exist were the line "let us go, then,
> > and me"...
> It comes right after the epigraph which presents Dante in the company of
> Virgil - the lesser poet being led by the greater. The parallel of the
> I as the writer (leader/creator of the expedition/experience) of the poem,
> and the you as the reader (recreator of the experience) is interesting.
But isn't the epigraph more specifically Guido who is speaking in the
belief that the person to whom he speaks is one who will not return to the
world? I don't know that the reader is actually brought into the poem
except by the epigraph: that is, we know that Dante did leave Hell, and so
we know that the poem did leave Prufrock's mind, if you will. In this I
find a subtle suggestion that everything else within the poem is internal
dialogue, rather than a direct discourse with the reader - and so, in
other words, "I" is not the reader who is being led by Prufrock, but is
I apologize if I'm not putting any of this very well; blame a mind
etherised by corporate America...