Then there was Eliot's observation about the past taking a different
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: autobiography & 4Q
> For some reason your message and all the previous ones are blocked, so
> if I get some of your text slightly wrong, I'm sorry. But your claim
> about the ouvre as an exciting and unified quest is simply one of many
> claims. As early as 1949 Elizabeth Drew argued that it was, using
> Jungian archetypes as her template. On the other hand, F. O.
> Matthiessen, in his groundbreaking book, took no such single-thread
> approach. And all that we now know about Eliot's life--that neither
> Drew nor Matthiessen knew--cannot be used to demonstrate such a singular
> reading. Nor do current critical theories agree on this.
> It is simply not possible to prove that what you like has any basis in
> either any "true" reading or any critical history: it is one way of
> reading, and it can be satisfying to many readers. It is not more.
> >>> Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]> 05/14/07 9:00 AM >>>
> 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