>1) Does anyone have a quotation that supports Perl's claim?

Tradition and the Individual Talent, end of paragraph 4:

Whoever has approved this idea of order, of the form of European, of English
literature, will not find it preposterous that the past should be altered by
the present as much as the present is directed by the past. And the poet who
is aware of this will be aware of great difficulties and responsibilities.


I'll look into the harder stuff later.

Regards,
    Rick Parker



On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:03:03 -0400, Tom Colket <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>Please forgive this long post, but I have a few Eliot questions that the
list may be able to help with.
>
>I've listened to a course-on-tape by Professor Jeffery Perl, University of
Texas, called "Literary modernism, The Struggle for Modern History". In one
of the lectures talking about James Joyce's novel 'Ulysses', Professor Perl
made the following point, which I have transcribed from the tapes:
>
>=====================
>"T. S. Eliot, upon reading early drafts of Joyce's chapters, became
convinced that all great art, in being, as he said, 'really new', and at the
same time, conforming to the pattern of artworks already in existence, he
said that the really new work of art alters not only the present but also
the past -- That is, by the way, also how psychoanalysis works. You alter
the PAST, not merely the present -- No one reads Homer anymore as he was
read before the publication of 'Ulysses'. You can't do it."
>=====================
>
>I have unsuccessfully tried to find an Eliot quote that supports Perl's
claim that Eliot said that really new works of art alter the past.
>
>1) Does anyone have a quotation that supports Perl's claim?