I had always thought that the Dog was that at the end of Inferno I and the
metamorphosis from wolf to dog in TWL recognised that i.e. in the TWL we
also have a displacment of the wolf by dog which is the 'plot'. The corpse
surely is none other than Adonis who must stay his season underground as a
"cropse", except a seed fall etc. The parousia is therefore yet again
In the context of the Tarot, the dog that's friend to men features on the
Fool's card, although he seems to be both encouraging and warning against
the step into the void from the mountains where, judging by the look on the
Fool's face, he feels free.
The Dog in the Inferno I take to be Can Grande. Dante's letter to Can
Grande sets out how to read the Commedia and is based on ST along the
There is an interaction between the last article of the first treatise, the
treatise on sacred text, in the Summa Theologica ("ST") and Dante's letter
to Can Grande. Aquinas identifies the literal signification of words ('A')
as things ('B') and the spiritual signification of things as types ('C').
Then A : B as B : C. But there is the missing fourth ('D'), which is
reality, which is being true: everything that is is true (Pt I, Q1, Art1,
Ob1). Therefore A : B as B : C as C : D.
There are three sorts of literal meaning: historical, etiological and
Historical is descriptive writing (word = thing); etiological is dialectical
writing (word <> thing); analogical is poetic writing (word = thing and word
<> thing: 'Joseph is (and obviously isn't) a fruitful bough').
Descriptive writing is historically late but logically prior since it seems
to reflect the world perfectly: to be 'literally true'. The logically prior
is the historically anterior and vice versa. In order to see the logical
form of a text its historical matter must have been read over time.
Historical (horizontal) text is forever trying to take a logical (vertical)
Dialectical writing seeks the secret cause of things and revolves around the
deconstruction of words such as 'justice' by Socrates in the Republic or
'neighbour' by Jesus in the gospels, both denying the literal or legal or
social meaning of those words proposed by their opponents. Poetic writing
says that words themselves are things that can bring about change: they are
the secret cause of things: in the beginning was the Word as hidden telos.
There are three sorts of spiritual meaning: figurative, allegorical,
The figurative is where the thing is just the thing in its thinginess: its
sensible being, the contemplation of which is our eternal knowledge. The
allegorical is where the thing signifies: its moral or ethical sense, as in
a parable: its ethical being, the action of which is our eternal activity.
The anagogical is where the thing is a type of an anti-type: Joshua of Jesus
or the glory of this world of the greater glory behind it: its ternal
From: T. S. Eliot Discussion forum. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Rickard A Parker
Sent: 06 June 2007 15:15
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Yoruba and TSE
Diana Manister wrote:
> Dear CR: the Dog of Conscience. That reading fits very well.
> Now where is the poem's narrator in all this? It seems he is pointing
> the finger at the amoral who feel no guilt and saying Tsk Tsk, rather
> than including himself in their number. What do you think?
It seems to me that the narrator IS including himself:
'You! hypocrite lecteur!--mon semblable,--mon frère!'