From: "Ken Armstrong" <[log in to unmask]>
> he thought it would be a success. Whatever this may mean, it should mean
> that the business of interpreting him is going to be at a different level
> of intensity than interpreting, say, Robert Frost. The dynamics of an
> poem just aren't as simple.
A different level of intensity AND several levels of understanding
simultaneously. An Eliot poem is an archetypical multitasker.
Sometimes I think the criticism of the semetic element in "Burbank"
is really meant to distract from the criticism of the crude US
social style in contrast to the decadent Viennese style. Youse
guys ain't got no culture. But that's only at the literal level.
By the time the crit. gets to a consideration of the anagogical level,
all it do is ask "Duh! what's that?"
The answer: "The Jew is under them all."