I'm guessing that when Eliot uses "would have been" he is not using
the future tense. If he meant to indicate a conflation of tenses he
would do so pointedly, as in the quote you posted.
Sent from my iPod
On Feb 1, 2010, at 5:23 AM, Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
> From: Diana Manister
> Dear Ken,
> All your convoluted reasoning cannot change the past to the future. A
> speaker musing about what might have been is not dreaming of the
> Peter observes by quoting:
> "Time present and time past
> Are both perhaps present in time future,
> And time future contained in time past."