LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TSE Archives


TSE Archives

TSE Archives


TSE@PO.MISSOURI.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TSE Home

TSE Home

TSE  May 2007

TSE May 2007

Subject:

Personal attacks/autobiography & 4Q

From:

Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

T. S. Eliot Discussion forum.

Date:

Wed, 16 May 2007 11:04:19 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (196 lines)

You have no way of judging what is disingenuous; the criterion seems to
be that I said it.  That is one reason I stopped being involved in this
list and will probably stop again:  it has become a small group who say
things to each other, write each other notes, snipe at others, and mock
anything based in study of Eliot as opposed to shared and personal
feeling.  So please drop the assumption that you can judge.  It long ago
became impossible to have any actual discussion of poetry.

For example, the remarks below about oral culture are absurd.  Since I
spend a good deal of time on Scottish Studies and that was and in some
ways remains a largely oral culture, I am not likely to reject oral
material.  Your private sense of what went on or the personal response
of a couple of people is not "oral culture."  It is simply a few
responses.  And "academicism" is a completely meaningless snipe based in
nothing; Eliot was an academic who left it but took his scholarship with
him.  He did not know all that he did just because he had chats and
shared his feelings:  he had studied at Harvard through a Ph.D., which
was in fact accepted.  He also wrote constantly about written texts, and
his notes as well as his criticism are full of the erudition of years of
study.  It is astonishing that study of such a figure would dismiss his
own life-long academic-based writing.

It would be really interesting to have a discussion again about Eliot
that focused on poems and omitted all this personal meanness and totally
baseless comment on others.

I would be interested, for example, in views about Eliot's images of and
response to WWI.  
Nancy

>>> "Peter Montgomery" <[log in to unmask]> 05/16/07 6:22 AM >>>
Not ad personam in every message, just the ones which seem disingenuous.
A statement of curiosity is a standard ploy in double speak.

If by fact you understand something in print as opposed
to the oral report of general experience then it is understandable that
you don't see where fact comes into it. Academicism doesn't get
along well with oral culture.

Obviously there are any number of perceptions of any
common human experience. That is merely a truism.

P.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 6:47 AM
Subject: Re: autobiography & 4Q


> I also do not understand why every message must be ad feminem.  But I
> presume the Watsons had a perception not based on knowing every reader
> of Eliot.  There are differing perceptions by others who "lived
through
> the period."  I don't see where "fact" comes in to what you say.
> Cheers,
> Nancy
>
> >>> "Peter Montgomery" <[log in to unmask]> 05/15/07 7:14 AM >>>
> Somehow I think your curiosity is quite disingenuous, but if you must
> know,
> my thesis supervisor Sheila Watson  and her husband Wilfred, lived
> through the period and saw the process happen, both during their early
> life
> together in Paris and subsequently, even to the time that they were
> professors.
> So I suppose I absorbed it by osmosis from their frequent discussions
of
> it
> and from their seminars. I suppose an academicist might think Wilfred
at
> least was biased in his observations because Eliot published his
poetry.
> Neither of them liked Eliot worship, and were skeptical about the
degree
> to which people let themselves be influenced by him.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>; <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 8:51 AM
> Subject: Re: autobiography & 4Q
>
>
> > I'm curious:  what is your source and basis for this evaluative
claim?
> >
> > >>> Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> 05/14/07 7:01 AM >>>
> > The kind of popularity he enjoyed after the 20s had nowhere near the
> > intensity and universality as that which followed that period. It's
> just
> > a
> > fact. Whether
> > a lessening of intensity constitutes a waning is for the rabbit
> butchers
> > to
> > decide.
> >
> > P.
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 1:02 PM
> > Subject: Re: autobiography & 4Q
> >
> >
> > > He lost popularity with many.  He gained it with others.  To say,
as
> > > Peter did, that "no doubt his popularity waned when he became a
> > > Christian," is quite different:  it makes an absolute out of a
> > rejection
> > > of simplicity.  There have always been readers who preferred the
> early
> > > poems and readers who preferred the late.  Some who championed the
> > early
> > > work as rejecting belief were negative about Eliot's changing
> attitude
> > > and poetry; others were more impressed.  This is not difficult to
> > > understand.
> > >
> > > In recent years his popularity has--if conference schedules and
> > articles
> > > mean anything--increased as those old simplistic dichotomies have
> been
> > > reconsidered.
> > > Nancy
> > >
> > > >>> Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]> 05/13/07 4:31 PM >>>
> > > At 11:31 AM 5/13/2007, Nancy Gish wrote:
> > >
> > > "It is not at all the case that at any point he.... in any way
lost
> > > popularity because of Christianity.  That is simply a distortion
of
> > the
> > > critical history and is not the point I made.  My point was
> precisely
> > > that
> > > this sort of simplification is inaccurate."
> > >
> > > and previously wrote:
> > >
> > > "Very few readers read him as proposing a religious idea when his
> > first
> > > work came out. Many were distressed at the turn in the late 20s
and
> > > 30s.  They were
> > > mainstream critics."
> > >
> > >   If the first statement quoted above is true, does the second
mean
> > that
> > >
> > > the mainsteam critics were distressed with their own reaction to
> "the
> > > turn
> > > in the late 20s and 30s"?
> > >
> > > Ken A.
> > >
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date:
> > 5/12/2007
> > 6:40 PM
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date:
> 5/12/2007
> 6:40 PM
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date:
5/12/2007
6:40 PM
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



PO.MISSOURI.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager